"Anthropological Mumbo Jumbo"

Cathy Wylie, in her criticism pi Evelyn Reed's talk, accused Reed of manufacturing myths to suit her own purposes. In the process, Wylie manages to make just as many unfounded assumptions as she attributes to Reed. She takes for granted that present day anthropologists are completely unbiased and has obviously swallowed all the distortions they have felt it necessary to dish out. She asserts, as they do, that primitive societies were male dominated and dismisses the discoveries of pioneer anthropologists such as Morgan and Taylor as unsubstantiated myths. Jeff Wilson (Salient May 20) was right when he called this viewpoint "anthropological mumbo jumbo".

Levi-Strauss and other well-known anthropologists attempts to conceal or discredit the findings of their predecessors in the interests of maintaining the status quo. These eminent "experts", instead of trying to make out a pattern in human history, reduce it to a chaotic muddle. However, according to them, we can be sure of at least one thing, that the oppression of women and the institution of the family are eternal and ineradicable. This is intended to bring a clear message to women: "Don't fight it".

Unfortunately for the "experts" many women, unlike Cathy Wylic, have begun to reject this theory, and are looking to the longsuppressed discoveries of the pioneer scholars to find clues to the cause of their oppression. Feminists like Evelyn Reed are attempting to shed light on a subject which has been muddied and concealed by reactionary anthropologists. By investigating history they are endeavouring to do as Cathy Wylie suggests, to find the "cause of unrest" in the hope of overcoming it.

Smear of the Year

For some time now it has been evident that many 'radicals' on campus have been fishing around for something to which they can anchor their anti-Trotskyism. And guess what some of them have finally dredged up? That 'Great Patriotic Leader', 'Father of all the Peoples', dear old Joe Stalin himself. Or, should I say, that mastermind at frame-up trials, that expert at re-writing history, that counter-revolutionary giant whose policies were responsible for the miscarriage of revolutions all over the world... that imminent Grave-digger of Revolutions !

Just three or four years ago Stalin and Stalinism were anathema to virtually all those people who had radicalised during the 1960's. And justifiably so. Few would dare to 'justify' the invasion of Czechoslovakia 1968, their repression against dissedents in the USSR, and the right-wing role of the Staliist French Communist Party in the revolt of May 1968.

It appears, however, that a tiny group of Wellington radicals are beginning to re-think their position towards Stalin. Exhibit one; The reply written by Donald and Peter Franks to George Fyson's article "Why the Vietnamese had to make Concessions" in the May 30. issue of Salient (here they protest at Fyson's 'smearing' Stalin and defend the French CP's role in relation to IndoChina 1947-48.) Exhibit two: Peter Wilson's statement to me a couple of weeks ago that Trotsky 'underestimated' or 'ignored' the peasantry in his theoretical writings, and that he was 'wrong on every major question' — two classic Stalinist positions. Exhibit three: The picture of Stalin in the Salient window (in replace (sic) of the infamous 'ice-pick'.) Exhibit four: The way some radicals who are influenced by Maoism defend China's role during the struggle in Bangla Desh; and Nixon's trip to China at a time when he was escalating the Indochina war to new heights.

While I would draw back at this time from claiming that these discernible trends represent a full-blown flight into the Stalinist camp, I would nevertheless like to draw readers' attention to the signs. They point to what could prove to be a 'major' turn on the part of some of the radicals on this campus. And if that is the case, 'comrades', you are going from bad to worse. You are setting out on a truly treacherous path.

Roger's Review Rubbished

I was amused by Roger Steele's emasculation in Salient of May 30 of Colin James' and Jim Eagles' book, "The making of a New Zealand Prime Minister," which recently hit the waiting world. It appears that Mr Steele is more concerned to identify himself with the trendy, anti-establishment club than to provide Salient readers with a thoughtful and objective review of this work.

My disappointment stems from the fact that running through the entire article is the theme that the authors were "too busy piddling in Norm Kirk's pocket" (to borrow a quote Peter Wilson uses in an article in the same Salient) and apparently are too terrified of Norm to reveal to a breathless public the true, sordid facts of the 1972 election and the dirty political background (in contrast to the supposed "clean" facts in the book) to this now famous election.

If anything does not stand up to analysis, then its Roger Steele's article. Perhaps he has actually read the book, judging by the odd quote he throws in. However, he does not seem to fully understand it. I hope the following points elaborate my criticisms.

Not wishing to ignore one of the sole sensible points Steele makes and thus lay myself wide open to a charge of bias, I join him in strongly condemning the ineffective proof-reading. This is most prevalent in NZ printed books and more care should be taken to eradicate it.

In conclusion, I think Roger Steele has rushed in and attempted to hack this book to pieces because he feels that he might be subject to ridicule if he dares to praise any aspect of a book written on NZ politics. It takes less courage to cut loose with accusations of sycophancy blinding objectivity and lack of analysis. NZ is sadly deprived of any decent political reporting in its news media. It certainly suits certain people to deprive the masses of objective and searching analysis of the actions of our politicians, but this does not augur well for our so-called "democratic" society. I don't claim that James and Eagles have knocked down the walls, but they have certainly established a refreshingly and bold precedent. Let us not knock this effort without proper cause, but hope that it will give others the courage and impetus to tred the same path and go even further. I hope that people will not be put off by Roger Steele's rather silly article but that they will read this book and form their own opinion.

Right Hand Column up the Pole

Before too many innocent readers of last week's 'Salient' take the suggestion in the "Right Hand Column" that cohorts of Sydney police were waiting at the airport to turn back any "Vic Stirrers" who tried to wreck this year's PBEC conference seriously, they might be glad to know that the very weekend of that conference these same much-feared Vic stirrers were notably absent from a party in their own student union: the official celebration of the 25th aniversary of the Zionist settler-state, Israel. A university which boasts a radical student press and an executive with a radical posture — regardless of its actual composition— can hardly be proud to have sat silently by while the dignitaries from two governments, led as they are by parties of the second International, gloated over the settler-state's "rugged history" in international politics.

Last year's PBEC conference actions, (as notable for those which were not taken as far as those which were) should have been enough to warn the union management committee against renting its facilities to an intergovernmental orgy such as this, especially since that committeee has a (paper) majority of students. The fact that they chose to permit the function to be held indicates that they hold the "radical" posture of the executive in quite justifiable contempt. Their "gamble" was a notable success. Surely students are able to assert their right to determine what functions shall or shall not be permitted in their own building after all these years. And if the PBEC action wasn't precedent enough, at least this should put a hasty end to the belief of some union management functionaries that the buildings is theirs, if the Vic stirrers will only assert themselves.

Which brings me to another item in the same "Right Hand Column", which implied that the decision of the local PSA not to support opposition to the tour was a slap in the face for student pensioner Mike Law and his Hart cronies. The implication is too senseless and esoteric in itself to warrant serious comment, especially since I am loath to find myself defending Law. But in fairness to your readers, and there must be some other Scorpios among them with an eye for truth, let me set the record straight as far as the PSA is concerned. The local PSA has long held a reputation as the most reactionary section in NZ, which it has gone out of its way to defend. When the Wellington section decides to disassociate itself from the strong opposition to the Springbok tour by the National Executive, on the seemingly democratic grounds that individual sections were no consulted on the decision, they are declaring themselves in favour of the tour. When they suggest a postal ballot of all PSA members before any move to affiliate with the FOL, you can detect the same hollow-sounding ring of democracy, barely concealing an almost pathological fear of any strengthening of the labour movement in either its political or industrial wings.

And finally let me congratulate you on perpetuating the tradition of inserting large blank spaces in your articles. Wanganui Chronicle's Garry Mead at least has the sense to recognise whose side he is on, and equally important, whose side you are on, and act in accordance with his class interests, if I can use that word these days. If your Right Hand Columoist was endowed with equal cognitive powers there would be no need for me to write this letter.

Roger Cruickshank

Hello! Talk about Divine Providence - This is just exactly what I've been looking for!

"I don't believe the Vietnamese said it."

The Franks brothers' reply printed next to my article in the last Salient contains so many errors that it would be impossible to answer them all in one letter. However, you readers can be assured that a full, rounded analysis will appear in a special four page feature on Indochina in the next issue of Socialist Action which will be on sale from June 15 onwards.

But there is one central point which I must take up here:

From the beginning, the antiwar movement in the U.S.A. has been split into two principal camps. One of these, now represented by the National Peace Action Coalition (NPAC) has consistently had as its central demand "All U.S. troops out of South East Asia Now". NPAC takes the view that the United States has no right to negotiate anything at all in Indochina, and that everything connected with U.S. presence there — including the puppet regimes in Saigon, Pnom Penh etc — should be pulled out. This is the "Out Now" strategy. NPAC has been behind all the key mass antiwar mobilisations in Washington and other U.S. cities in recent years.

The other wing of the U.S. antiwar movement, which has supported some of the mass mobilisations, is currently represented by the People's Coalition for Peace and Justice (PCPJ), in which the thoroughly conservative, pro-Moscow U.S. Communist Party participates. These latter forces have hopped from one line to another through the yean. In 1965 they called for "Stop the Bombing; Negotiate" as opposed "Out Now". And in fact when President Johnson stopped the bombing and started to negotiate, they were completely disoriented and demobilised for a whole period.

Then in 1971 the PCPJ took up the call to support the "Support the 7 Points" as opposed to "Out Now". (The 7 Point Programme was at that time the negotiating position of the Vietnamese.) The difference between "Out Now" and the "7 Points" has been aptly summarised as the difference between "Out Now" and "Out Later".

Later, in 1972, PCPJ called for "Sign the Peace Agreement Now" as opposed to "Out Now". Now they call for "Respect the Cease Fire Agreement" as opposed to "Out Now". Of course the PCPJ has adopted all these positions under the cover of "doing what the Vietnamese ask".

They did not ask "demand Nixon sign the Agreement now" or that Nixon "recognise two Administrations" in the South, though this was what they were offering at that lime at the conference table. Any claim that the Vietnamese want the antiwar movement to water down its demands to such provisions of the peace accords is hogwash.

Nationwide Slops

Some people sitting next to me are commenting on the fact that you can no longer get lousy food all of the time, only part of the time. The food is lousy, the prices arc too high and the service is terrible. Once upon a time not so long ago kiddies, you could get good food at a reasonable cost from a clean and tidy cafeteria. But now, Nationwide Foods have moved in, and all that has gone.

It is about time the big-wigs around this place took a long, hard look at the catering service. Better still, they should try and get something to eat at 6pm without queuing for half an hour and ending up with five minutes to eat the shit they end up with.

How long are we going to have to put up with the filth and the food? When will something be done to lower the prices, produce decent meals and clean up the foul mess? I hope there is someone who can give me a simple answer, as I'm rapidly getting pissed off with everything, and one day might throw a plate of three day old curry and rice at the head! cook.

The Old Boys Aren't Quite Dead

In last week's "Right Hand Column" you mocked Mike Law because "his" Wellington section of (he P.S.A. had dissociated itself from the national body's support of Hart. It should be noted, however, that MGL is an employee of the P.S.A. and so has no voting or speaking rights at section committee meetings.

Nevertheless, certain other former student stirrers now on the Wellington Section Committee of the P.S.A. were outvoted on the Hart issue. Included in these were Errol Miller ( President OUSA 1970, Administrative Officer NZUSA 1971-1972), Roger Cruickshank (1971 Editor of Salient) and yours truly,

Tim Sheppard.

South Pacific Construction Ltd.

Our attention has been drawn to the May issue of the "Salient" in which this firm's name appeared associated with a heading "fraud" which is a rather extravagant claim. May we correct the statements regarding this firm with the following facts.

A Poem from the Library

Revolution 72
We have listened to the people
tread softly for too long
toes a mile wide
and twice as long
from every hole appear
Waited in this night
for some flare to show
the start
But nothing's come
and iron wills
rust with time
and men's words are empty now.

Revolution — Or How Salient Sold Out To The Labour Party

The time has come for something to happen—enough of this liberal ranting — it is time for action.

The Salient magazine as the spokesman for the university radicals must now decide exactly what their ideological position is. The magazine's editors preach socialism but they continually miss perhaps the most burning question involved in all discussions about the subject. Firstly it must be established how desirable this state of existance is and secondly to what ends are people prepared to go to achieve socialism. Thirdly, on the basis of previous findings, what tactics should be used to achieve the drastic change desirable and indeed necessary. It is my observation that what is happening at the present time is that small groups of Marxists are created by the University system and then because of a lack of any real action these people become disillusioned and either become student politicians (e.g. Peter Wilson) or worse start writing for Landfall (e.g. Chris Wainwright).

Even worse because they become frustrated by inactivity and the totally destructive bickering goes on between radical groups — e.g. the constant attacks on the Young Socialists who perhaps more than anyone have helped to raise the consciousness of various young people both on and off campus.

This is not a defence of the Socialist Action League but an attack on those pseudo-revolutionaries who when questioned display a total lack of comprehension about even the most basic doctrines and issues involved.

Thus the revolutionary movement has been led astray by band wagon jumpers who want to be in on the cool scene.

Perhaps even more destructive is the movements alignment with the Labour movement. For God's sake, it has been pointed out countless times that Trade Unionists can only achieve Trade Unionist's consciousness and this is a polite way of saying they remain the most conservative reactionary group in the entire society, at least most bourgeoise have some notions of freedom and equality.

Thus the movement hacks at its own members, of the Young Socialists, Socialist Action league etc etc and tries to strike an impossible friendship with the unions and the Labour Party.

It is interesting to note from what 'source' the Salient newspaper is now getting much of its material (usually) unacknowledged —although I suppose this stems mainly from shame that deceit — yes you guessed it the great liberal weekly the New Statesman, e.g. the article on the death penalty in the USA.

This unfortunate paper now under editorship of R. Grosman (a liberal newspaper if there ever was one) has attempted to align itself to the British Labour Party and yet remain true to the principles on which the paper was provided by the Webbs among others. The result has been a constant trade on non-action writing sacrificing any real discussion for sermons on the morality of the Conservative Government. Of course they are immoral — all Government in Western nations are.

Again and again the road to socialism has been led astray by Labour Governments. There will never be any real change if we continue to rely on the leadership of professional Labour Politicians and trade union leaders.

Let me summarise what I think has happened — in the present set up our education systems are producing enough misfits Who have the independence of mind to believe that the present social system is corrupted beyond reform and only total destruction and replacement of it by a Marxist state can solve the problem. On the other hand you have a large group of liberals and conservatives all equally unconvinced, unseeing and for the sake of revolutionary change — unimportant.

No amount of articles are going to persuade the unconvinced that they are wrong so why bother? In fact the very fact of compromising to these people is dangerous. You now have the means of production in your control, that is the means of producing a newspaper, if you can't use this to revolutionary ends why should you be able to use industry when we finally attain control for the same ends?

No newspaper must be produced for those people who agree with our aims. The democratic right of people to read what they want is the 'right' of a defunct and rotten society — after all the liberals have Time' magazine and the Conservatives have the daily papers.

We have been so corrupted by liberal western Christian ideology that the revolutionary movement has become afraid of the use of the very words revolution; violence, assassination, means justifying ends. The whole concept of blowing up railways and government buildings has become a rather amusing thought. And yet this is the way, probably the only way revolutions are won, we must be prepared to use violence. There are quite simply enough people who disagree with us, that it is inconceivable that they will give into our demands without a struggle.

An example of liberal reaction to you paper was to be experienced when I witnessed people laughing at your article on the use of explosives, as if it was some sort of substitute for the Freak Brothers.

Franks, Steele, Wilson, etc. you arc self appointed leaders of the Revolution, are you going to cop out when it comes to action. They have time on their hands, time to wait and let us become disillusioned and embittered rather than optimistic and determined. Other countries have had change violent and swift — it is possible.

We must I) Unify. 2) Exclude those hangers on who will never be prepared to go all the way 3) Decide tactics. 4) Carry these out.

The time has come
The time has come
to speak of many things
of revolution and change
of violence and guns.

P.S. Revolution is not acheived by waiting even if we wait forever.

[If the writer of this barely legible piece had looked beyond the cartoon in the New Statesman and the Salient article he mentions, he would have discovered that there was no further similarity. Our article on Politics and the Death Penalty was written by a member of the VUW Law Faculty. His claim that we get much of our material from the New Statesman is entirely without foundation. —Eds]

Missing Person

Last week you published a letter from my old mate L.D. Bronstein. Can you tell me where he is? I should like to get in touch with him urgently.

A Radical's Breakfast

Muesli is the cereal but as I'm eating it I find cornflakes on the plate. The cornflakes are lacking in goodness limited and overprocessed but they are not even worth eating. The Trots are these cornflakes and we should not bother with the crap. They are just not worth the energy currently being absorbed in the sport of Trot baiting. Even if it is a change from the easy to see Christians there are much more important things to do.

Gratitude

I was speechless with horror when I read Neil Wright's review of my "Kitset of 26 Poems" (in Salient for May 23) — it's the most Obscene piece of writing I've ever come across—why didn't your printer have the grace to censor it?

Neil Wright rang me up the other day and said his review had been published in Salient. So what? said I. Shall I send you a copy? he asked. Could you spare two? I said — One for me and one for the Amphedesma Press. Two? he said — I've got two hundred!

What can you do against egomania on that scale? It consoles me though that Salient took eight months to publish the review — the nausea can't put anyone off buying the book, because all the copies have been sold.

This letter is to publicly wash my hands of the review and all personal remarks contained therein. (I hereby wash my left hand and my right.)

The missing link in Neil Wright is that he has never realised that poetry is about emotion and he wouldn't know emotion if it licked him in the face.

Religion is Hogwash, But........

This letter is to be read in bed. (It is aimed at the sleepy members of society.)

I agree with Noel Blake when he says there is no proof for God, or Christ's existence, but to tell me to give up Christianity because there is no proof of it, is beyond my comprehension. All right, religion is is irrational, but what isn't? Life to me is less irrational (not more rational) with religion than without it.

The church as you say is stuffed, but I wouldn't say that about what Jesus taught (it seems relevant to me, but then you aren't a Christian are you?)

I'm sorry if us Bible bashers bug you man, but you did ask us why we didn't up and leave people in peace. With that last comment I will let you get hack to your, 'disturbed peace', good night!

Henry Jennings Unmasked

I write to express my concern at the sudden downturn in your usually impeccable tastes that allowed you to print Henry Jennings' review of "Vietnamese Phrasebook", in the May 23 Salient.

The man is quite patently an academic fraud and I wonder that you did not spot this as soon as his babblings crossed your desk. The sort of man who can spend his time grubbing among the refuse of the American involvement in Vietnam, completely ignoring the on-going struggle in that country, is quite clearly not the sort of aware writer your paper generally encourages.

His bourgeois academic origins are further betrayed by his predilection for tautological phrases and his obvious urge to indulge his need for juvenile voyeurism.

An example of Jennings' abuse of the English language is the pompous sentence "A major shortcoming of the book is the lack of referents given for the frequent consequences of such casual (i.e. sexual) relationships." Why couldn't he say simply "The book gives no words for pox"?

It is noticeable that Jennings attempts to hide hit own prurient interest in sex by beginning one paragraph with "The more salacious among us....." Who's kidding whom?

The only explanations for your editorial lapse in printing this rubbish are that you suffered a temporary mental derangement or received a backhander from Jennings. Neither explanation confers much credit on you. Kindly mend your ways and I shall continue to be your ever-delighted reader.

Ted Sheehan

Religion Not Hogwash

In reply to Noel Blake's letter in Salient 30/5/73, I would like to say God is real! Noel's letter was head "Religion is Hogwash" — well, his religion might be, mine isn't.

He started off by criticising Christians because they attacked certain Marxist and radical views. He said that Christians thought they were "superior creatures". Firstly, there is nothing wrong with criticising Marxist or radical views. Christians have just as much right as those who aren't Christians to criticise. Besides, some Christians hold radical views anyway. Secondly, few Christians consider themselves superior. We are just as bad as everyone else — but we have Jesus Christ living in us — that's the difference —and we consider that He's so wonderful that others should know about Him.

Noel says that there is no proof for God's existence. Again this is not true. There are a number of proofs that God exists. One is the Bible. Contrary to what some people believe, the Bible is one of the most accurate historical texts. No statement in it has ever been proven wrong by archeology. In the Bible, which Christians believe was inspired by God, there are certain prophecies made, sometimes, hundreds of years before they were fulfilled, and all have come true at the right time. There are other proofs. But we Christians know God is real. We have experienced him in our lives. Ask Barry McGuire, Cliff Richards, or any of the hundreds of Christians on campus.

Noel says that the Church is corrupt — meaning the Roman Catholic Church. This might or might not be true, but I am not a Catholic and my particular church is nothing like that particular demoniation. But true Christian belief is not in what any particular church says, but what the Bible says.

As for Christian morality, the Biblical moral code is the wisest moral code in existence. Where societies have followed it, peace and security have resulted; where societies have given it up, the nation starts failing apart like many countries are doing today.

Christianity is not irrational — there are many intelligent people who are Christians — and Christianity is not irrelevant today. You need Jesus! Jesus is the only one who can give your life a sense of direction, and meaning, as well as assurance of going to Heaven and not Hell. Why not turn to Him? The Bible says, "God loved the world so much that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him may not die, but have eternal life."

Malaya and Mao

The hostility of Malayan and Singapore authorities against the People's Republic of China, like the foreign policy of New Zealand in the past, is due to the colonialist pressures. The economic and political well-being of the Malayan (including Singapore) people has seriously distorted for years. In this present political arena of change, the hesitancy of Malaya (including Singapore) in deciding the necessary adjustments has resulted in her political and economic isolation and stagnation, with resultant hardship to the people at large. The present archaic foreign policy of Malaya is obviously due partly to the hangover from oldtype colonialism and partly to modern superpower pressures. However, as a result of public pressures and the genuine wish of the Malayan people, the authorities of Kuala Lumpur and Singapore are forced to adopt new policies by altering the old situation. Diplomatic relations between the People's Republic of China and the two governments of Malaya are expected to begin in the very near future, perhaps in 1973. Such development is certainly welcome by the people of both countries.

The Main Trend in the World Today

It was good to hear from my friend J.V. Stalin (Salient 36, 23/5/73). He has unfortunately rested now for some 20 years and has not been able to see how the general crisis of Capitalism has developed during his long sleep.

He will undoubtedly study the actual situation today as he did in the past and I predict that he will discover that revolution is the main trend in the world today. I am sure that he will agree that in this situation of the drive towards war by imperialism, revolution will prevent imperialist war, or that imperialist war will be ended by revolution.

Capping Disruption

The capping disrupter seems to have a thing about teachers — but what is the author trying to teach? He has a nice turn of phrase about his use of anatomical functions in a wordy way. I read also that "the University is right now training you to forego the right to control your own destiny" — well he didn't have to go to university. The Public Library has a large selection of books available — who was the joker who read books as he walked behind his plough. Seems to me the "capping disrupter" has a secret yen to be a teacher, of what?

The Death Throes of U.S. Imperialism

The U.S. House of Representatives voted by 219 to 188 on May 10. l973 to deny the government additional funds for the bombing of Cambodia. Although the immediate sum involved is not large, and the government still has alternative methods of appropriating funds for the bombing of Cambodia, the voting represents a great victory for the American people and the major political groupings in the U.S. The general opinion shows that at least 75 per cent of the entire American nation are against U.S. intervention of any kind in Cambodia.

Continued tension in Indochina, the threat to the Paris Agreement and the bombing of Cambodia are the direct result of the U.S. imperialist aggressive policy towards Indochina, and their use of airfields and other facilities in Thailand to implement this policy. The continued cynicism of those in authority in Washington in regarding Vietnam and Indochina is, however, part of the U.S. general defence scheme which is a long term weakness of imperialism.

Nevertheless, to talk in this vein is to ignore the spirit and letter of the Paris Agreement and to revive the spectre of global intervention by U.S. imperialism which caused so much bloodshed in various parts of the world and brought so much discredit and suffering to the American nation.

The Thai authorities permitting their country to be used as a foreign aggressors' base should equally be blamed and condemned. Such practice is in actuality against the spirit of peace and friendship that has existed for centuries among the peoples of Asia.

I'm glad I don't have those sorts of problems

Labour Club up to its Tricks

I find it interesting to note that the Victoria University Labour Club held it's A.G.M. on Tuesday 28, just two weeks after the New Zealand Labour Party's Annual Conference. Is there some hidden meaning in this? Is it perhaps that the rank and file would not he able to discuss those boring remits. Or is it that they were not to be allowed to even suggest who their delegate was to be.

I hesitate to mention to these outstanding persons but did they know that what they were doing was just a bit unconstitutional. I quote from the Labour Party Constitution. Page 10 section 9 (c): 'The annual meeting shall be held in March of each year."

I does smell a little bit doesn't it?

God is a Wanker

Way back in the old days, some jokers thought up ideas that would (they thought) make the world a better place to live in. Then they thought, well how the fuck can we make these good ideas credible? They then invented God. Knowing that most people believed there was some sort of 'superior being', they transferred heathen beliefs into Christian beliefs. Then, around 1970 years ago, some different jokers saw how the beliefs in God were not as well recieved as before. So they invented Jesus. Well, this was just absolutely shit hot until recently when people like Noel Blake (letter May 30), myself and George Bernard Shaw saw what a fake the whole fucking lot is.

Just looking around, it seems that Christians are the most apathetic lot there is. They forget about problems and think, well God will see it right, we won't worry. You see, people have to think there is someone superior, some saviour, someone who directs and hears them. What the hell has God done? Nothing.

Seminar on Seminars

I would like to know whether or not this university has a staff member or student capable or inclined to conduct a seminar on 'How to conduct Seminars'.

My reason tor asking is this. At the time of writing I am listening' to seminars in a science subject being presented by a group of students who have, in the main, not presented a seminar before. I haven't, and if my presentation was as bad as some others, I would appreciate a lesson in this subject. Discussion among the class shows that several other students would similarly appreciate instruction in seminar presentation.

The lecturer for our course acknowledges that some advice before the presentation would have helped. It is unfortunate that most of you spent the first 2-3 minutes of your seminar learning how to present your material,' he says. To bad, I agree, especially with in term assessment.

Can someone take the initiative on this matter?

Catering for Coprophagists

We all know that the 'Trots' eat shit (and enjoy it), but must the rest of the users of the University catering services be forced to also?

We must demand that the caterers cease pandering to a warped minority such as the 'Trots' and present us with some decent food.

Starve the Trots

The C.I.A. wants you

Five Good Reasons for being a Trot

We're not sure just what this means — Eds.

In my esteemed opinion, the abortion laws should be changed, in fact I believe that abortions should be made as readily available as a tonsillectomy.

As a point of interest I had a friend who needed a tonsillectomy, she had to wait eleven months for the operation.

No Contact Without Phone

Recently having required some information, and having been unable to obtain it from my usual sources, I resorted to the Contact Office.

Alter hiving to ask where it was as it bad been shifted from where it had been on my previous visit (last year) I side-stepped my way through accumulated furniture and directed my enquiry at the type behind the desk. I think he would have helped if he could but he didn't seem to have the information in his files. Helpfully he made a suggestion but he "wasn't sure". I was going to ask if he could ring up and check the place he suggested until I noticed he apparently didn't have a phone. Guess what I asked him? "Have you got a phone? " Well... all I got back was "dark mutterings" about how Contact had been trying to get a phone..... thought they had one at one stage but apparently it had been stolen.

Perhaps the masses aren't supposed to ask such questions but I do sometimes wonder what goes on in the management of the Union and Stud Ass. I don't know where Contact stands in relation to such people but it does seem to me that with the state this place is in at the moment anyone who is trying to do something for students should be getting a lot more assistance and support than Contact appears to be getting. Surely there must be one phone 'they' can re-locate there. I wonder how many other queries Contact has not been able to help for that very reason. I don't know how anyone else feels but a Contact Service without a phone just doesn't make sense to me!