Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

Salient. Official Newspaper of the Victoria University Students' Association. Vol 41 No. 7. April 10 1978

Letters

page 15

Letters

Letters must be typed, double spaced on one side of the paper, and should not run on and on boring everybody to death. They can be dropped into the letters box just inside the Salient door (middle floor of the Union Building, graveyard end), left at the Studass office, or sent c/o VUWSA, Private Beg, Wellington

Drawing of a man impaled by a giant pen

Atashi Criticised

Dear Sir,

It came to my attention in the speech given by Mr. Atashi that there were only 5 or 6 people involved with him in the pursuant discussion. Thus made it very hard for people like myself and Kiwis who attended the discussion to express our point of view. Also if one asked a question, Mr. Atashi did not answer it, but rearranged it to suit the answer he had prepared, which made this discussion into an emotional controversy which was not proceeding in any general direction. Even if he tried to answer a question, he was shouted down because of his abusive and evasive use of facts and figures, in a manner that was confusing to the audience.

How do we expect speakers like Mr. Atashi to speak in our university if we do not respect his rights as well as each others' rights? Even though Mr. Atashi and I have conflicting views about the Middle East situation, I found it better to refrain from asking any questions, as to give the average kiwi student a chance to get to know the problem a little better.

It was apparent that Mr. Atashi was intoxicated by the exuberance of his own verbosity.

Yours sincerely,

IDI

Druids in Dire Danger

Dear Sir,

It has come to my attention that there exists on campus, a group who parade under the banner of "FLD" and purport to follow in the traditions of the ancient and better left dead Druidic orders last prevalent many centuries ago.

These some what misguided individuals apparently don't realise the true nature of their supposed forebears or the severe risks they are taking, in envoking even in jest the powers of the occult which they obviously do not understand.

The original Druids were a bunch of de—praved sadists who had the delightful habit of performing human sacrifices which was not only antisocial and very messy, but totally unnecessary to the working of their rites.

Therefore ye who treat the occult forces lightly beware lest you incur a karmic debt of such magnitude that the rest of eternity will be required for absolution

A concerned member

of A.D.S.N.Z.

(So how is the reader to decide, from those who to us do confide Their wisdom of occult and metaphysical Which is wise and which just trivial?

But as for Druids and their sacrifice Tis true they say, we pay the price when decadent political expediency Corrupt religious integrity

It happened to Jews, to Christians and Islam Are we all to be forever damned And seek to cure our devout fellow man With rational minds who would see them banned?

— typstr)

Guest Attempts Clarification

Dear Simon,

Your report of the meeting on NZUSA held on April 1st and 2nd last was certainly very interesting, but I do not believe it gave a fair account of why Otago moved no confidence in the President of NZUSA.

In this letter, it would be difficult for me to explain the reasons but I believe however that there are two major things that are presently wrong with NZUSA.

Firstly, the structure does not allow for students at the so called grass root level to become involved and identify with their National Association. The structure allows for much participation from constituent Presidents and National Officers, but does not encourage, or perhaps even permit, direct participation from grass roots students. Clearly the only exception is when students request to participate in a protest or demonstration which has already been pre-determined by a meeting of constituent Presidents in Wellington.

Secondly however taking whatever structure of NZUSA you prefer, and giving that structure whatever priorities you personally prefer. I do not believe that NZUSA can exist satisfactorily with a President who is incapable of coping with present problems.

You article seemed to indicate that I simply wanted to get rid of Lisa Sacksen. This I have certainly attempted, but I do not think the mistake should be made of believing that this was the only thing I wanted to do.

I belive that the structure of NZUSA must allow for direct participation from students, and must ensure that the gap between students and the hierarchy of NZUSA is narrowed so that students are more readily able to identify with their National Association remembering of course/that their main purpose for attending the University is certainly far removed from simply an ability to join a prestigeous, compentent, efficient and powerful National Students Association!

Taking a structure that allows for direct participation, NZUSA must always act efficiently. I believe that NZUSA will always be less than that whilst there are student leaders in Wellington incapable of coping with-current problems.

These are the reasons that I believe that the structure of NZUSA should be changed. These are the reasons why I moved no confidence in the President of NZUSA after the matter having been discussed at the Otago Executive, and the subsequent two Student Councils. Those bodies gave official backing to my beliefs and along with clear indication from not less than six forums here I felt I had Otago support, and that Otago were right, in attempting to reform the structure of NZUSA and change less than satisfactory personnel.

[unclear: Finally], as you Simon were one of the people involved in a major NZUSA fuck up it does not surprise me that you have not relayed a true impression of NZUSA to your readers. Perhaps if you had, along with accurate reports on other NZUSA fuck ups, then students at Victoria may welll have supported the reforms which Otago intends to pursue.

Kind regards,

Andrew Guest

President OUSA

(How I wish this letter actually did help clarify Otago's position on NZUSA. But what are the arguments? Firstly you claim the structure does not allow for grass roots participation. What would you have, Andrew forced participation by all students at NZUSA meetings? As it stands any student has the perfect right to attend and speak at any meeting NZUSA holds, which is more than your association can claim.

You suggest that courses of action for NZUSA are decided by the constituent Presidents, and that students can do no more than go along with these decisions. Surely it is the responsibility of each constituent President to get a mandate from his/her campus if student participation in decision-making is to be increased. There is no way National Office can enforce this.

Your second point refers to the present "incapable" President. This is your opinion and you are entitled to it. However your reasons for holding this opinion, and your arguments as to why removing the present incumbent would be an effective way of solving NZUSA's problems have clearly not convinced any other constituent president. It is perhaps unfortunate that your letter does not give us any new insights to the you views.

Finally, you accuse me of bias in the whole affair. I would have suspected that such a claim would be substantiated more than you have been able to do. — Ed.)

Words on The Word

Dear Sir,

I am writing in reply to Gary Herrington's letter which appeared in the May 15 issue of Salient. In particular I wish to address myself to his comments on the relationship between the Christian faith and common sense.

He wrote that "The Christians have been quite successful in persuading people to accept the view that their assertions should not be judged by the standards of ordinary common sense" and he went on to say that he had never understood why they (Christians) are so special.

Gary, you have misconceived the Christian position. God invites all men to "Come now and let us reason together". (Isaiah 1 v. 18). The Christian religion has always been open to rational examination and great volumes of theological debate have been recorded. By no means is the Christian message some sort of irrational faith for the intellectually weak.

However, on the other hand, it is quite clear that the man who wishes to grasp the full meaning of Christ and the Christian faith cannot do so with a purely intellectually understanding. The truth is not merely a rational proposition but a living and burning spiritual reality. Christ did not merely speak true words, he was (and is) the Truth. And the faith which the Bible talks about is not an intellectual conviction in the truth of Jesus' words, for as Paul writes "With the heart man believes" (Romans 10 v. 10). The intellect will not lead us to Christ, it can take us only part of the way.

So while it is necessary to have an open mind it is more important not to prejudge with your heart. And I think if you approach the Christian [unclear: aith] in this manner you will be less quick to dismiss it.

Sincerely,

Peter Cotorceanu.

P.S. You can contact me at 893560 if you are interested in really talking it out.

Quiet Confessional

Dear Sir,

Reading last week's Salient, I came across a letter concerning the commonsense of Christianity. Now I am not at all a Christian, but although my Christian morals are incomplete, those I have are excellent, and so I am moved to defend a person attacked, even if it is an empty gesture. I mean, if faith is faith, as they say it is, even bad reasoning cannot touch it. I agree that the people often display a sentimentality that would make Isaiah writhe, but I cannot let fools berate fools for taking a good book to heart.

I know that I myself would rather be a good Kiwi than a bad Christian, yet I think that common sense is an inarticulate man's term for what we others would call mental foot-sloggery. True, it is always best to write easily verifiable sense in exams, marking-times being constricted nowadays but writers of those greater books took the best part of 1000 years to write those one thousand pages, since revelation comes at unexpected Ions-awaited moments. That is the difference between you and Isaiah.

I am glad to see the druids are coming-back again. I see they have attained a certain success, having their own little high-rise (I auspicious stories) on the corner or Woodward Street. The window area might be larger, yet I'm delighted [unclear: o] see that the druids have made it in a modern society. I have never been up to the board room but I do like to think that all those kind bearded old men congregate there every Wednesday, to brew magic potion which gives you the strength of ten men.

I was brought up to fear the tohunga, and would not wish to suffer the power of a makutu - but druids? Robert Graves pays you are men to fear, that in during training you must lie almost submerged in icy water, with a rock on your chest, for one night, and thus compose an epic poem and its tune. But I can't believe it.

Don't try to scare us with guff about controlling the weather; that rain was just a cold front from Antarctica way. All right, I admit it, who brought it here? Some power, I'll bet, but not a druid. You Druids are still Welsh in your hearts hearts, to control Southern Hemisphere weather, you have to perform all your old spells widder-shins, and as we all know, you won't do that.

So when you want rain you bring the sirocco and when you try to curse the summer and halt the solstices, you eclipsed the moon one night '(vertically too, and to see it emerge was beautiful) and brought us a decent summer. An inefficient evil is man's greatest delight. Good luck.

Yours etc,

Zurdo.

P.S. My first letter never came to its point directly but I did have a serious complaint. I see the TV is still burning away in the room on the top floor, and there's always an atmosphere of the most terrible abomination of cultural desolation there. It's bloody depressing, it reminds me of an old people's home I once had to visit, but the people there were dying anyway, and needed preparation for Purgatory.

Wombats are Best

Dear Sir,

I wish to protest in the strongest possible terms over the fawning and sycophantic letters appearing in your newspaper which adulate and acclaim aardvarks. Readers may not be aware that the aardvark is a native beast of South Africa. It is a most ugly creature with a long vacuum cleaner snout and a long thick tail. I suggest that its unprepossessing appearance and domicile in a country that practises unacceptable racial policies make it eminently unsuited to the kudos it has received in your columns.

I wonder whether your readers have ever considered the advantages of a wombat, (genus phas-colomys),? The wombat has an endearing stubby nose and a sensible rudimentary tail. It practices no particular racial policy and, unlike the aardvark, is a vegetarian. Although presently domiciled in South Australia, my organisation is trying to import the breed into New Zealand. To this end I shall be seeing Mr Ray La Varis M.P. on May 30th in the hope of arranging import licences on a commission basis, (to be paid in platypuses.)

If this fails, I will attempt to obtain visas for the wombats so that they may enter the country for a short visit. During this time marriages may be arranged for them so that they can stay in the country permanently. This scheme recently proved successful for an aardvark, Mr Francis Bart ho. Should any reader be interested in marrying a wombat, they should write to me, enclosing details of any blood relationship to the Prime Minister or a member of Cabinet.

Yours faithfully,

Col. Charles Cholmon- deley, Wadestown for Wombats Socy.

NEW YORK, Feb 19. — A doctor who took his own We after killing his mother and sister to save them from suffering was mistaken in his belief that his mother had cancer and his sister was ill, a medical examiner said today.

page 16

More Herrington Bashing

Dear Editor,

Mr. G. Herrington is apparently a man of anguish. Last year, he was "indignant" for the cause of the Croatians. This year, he has yet found another excuse for his hobby horse — rationalism (and tergiversation).

I have to speak out for the unborn child, who is the weakest, the youngest, and the most unresisting party. I wish to subscribe to the divinely insitituted teaching office of the holy Catholic Church on the issue of Morality. I do good-will by calling upon my protestant friends to recant that "Bible-only" doctrine which is a human tradition from the 16th Century.

The Catholic Church does not consider medically-indicated or therapeutic abortions always wrong. She does reject the false ethical principle that the end justifies even morally evil means. On the other hand, she does not lean to excesses like the Jainist non-violence: if one cannot avoid a snake one must submit to being bitten by it rather than kill it.

It is refreshing to see someone taking life so seriously as Mr. Herrington. I wonder whether he ever attempts to write his inks into actions. Has he thought of lending a hand to Mother Teresa and Brother Andrew in the slums and streets of Calcutta with Jeane Viemey in his mercy work among the intellectually handicaps, Doris Day in her stand with the "under privilieged "? What about the trial of the late Fr Damien in his leprosy mission, or even Fr Owen (the last Catholic Chaplain at VUW with whom Mr. Herrington had a "love-and-hate" affair) in his "chaste, poverty and obedience" apostolate in hazardous Zambia?

It is the "Saints" who give witness to the uniqueness of Christianity. These people (doing ordinary things extraordinarily well) give totally of themselves for the sake of humanity, without seeking glorification or even understanding. They are cheerful givers, and peculiarly, they claim that God is their strength and power. The Christians (Saints, in the custom of Paul) are about the Father's business (Jn 5:17) and God's fellow workers (1 Cor 3:9);

Yours sincerely,

K. Francisco

All the Queen's Men

Sir,

I am appalled at the standard of behaviour in this hallowed place of learning. It is all due to the left wing and socialist/communist influence on campus. Fascism is decried and yet only when it prevails can there be law and order prevailing within our society.

Only when men of high calibre thinking — non communists — run the country and we all rally around the Queen — God bless her name — can we pull through the current communist inspired depression by instilling in the population a sense of national pride and unity where the strong can make the country a safe and healthy place to live in once more. We shall then be rid of the need to demonstrate and other socialist inspired plots will be uncovered.

Law and order in these difficult days must be maintained and so the army should be able to help the police more. After all, when we are dealing with communists and other subversives the rules of our land must be obeyed and anyone who doesn't should not be allowed here.

Sincerely yours,

Sean Toffey

(Young Fascists Party of New Zealand)

God Save the Queen

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Christians and Bigots

Sir,

Strangely enough, in his reply to the reply Mr Gary Herrington makes a concession: he says, "the Christians have been quite successful in persuading people to accept the view...". Now why could this be? Surely there must be something in Christianity then.

As for "scrapping" the Christian clubs and the Chaplaincy - Mr Herrington has no more right to do that than one would have to scrap a Bigot's Club, were he to form one.

"Yours",

Kathy Drysdale

(Angsoc).

Politics made Plain, anybody?

Dear Sir,

Near the end of last year I promised the four tutorials I was taking in Political Science (Liberal Democratic Theory) that they would eventually be given an account of mine on the course. Well, I did not complete it, but handed in a skeleton of it to several members of the Pols Department, as well as earning my honours degree with it It is in two sections — (1) the idea of POLIS (2) ?. (2) almost impossible to read, but preferably after (1). It any of my students are game to follow up some of our tangled headaches of last year, then they might get hold of these 'essays'. You will not understand them.

Yours with best wishes,

Antony Skipper

Salient Lost in the Woods?

Dear Sir,

Drawing of a person digging stairs

I write to deplore Salient's spinelessness in deliberately refusing to provide students with information on the Pythagoras Owl issue. This is an affair of some importance involving a denial by a certain member of the academic staff of the English Dept. of this valuable creature's very right to exist.

I need hardly impress upon you the awesome ethical ramifications of this whole question. As a direct threat to civil liberties the recently enacted SIS legislation is its only parallel. Since the issue's original flare-up two weeks ago in Tutorial Room T303, the evil machinations of National censorship have been probed to their depths.

And You, editor of a student newspaper with a distinguished history of social conscience and struggle against oppression have been content on this occasion to just "go along with the rest of them". Could it be that this issue is too hot for even Salient to handle?

Come out of the woodwork, Wilson. Students want to know where you stand. You can't turn a blind eye to the Pythagoras Owl.

Yours in expectation,

a concerned member. Students Against Censorship

(I agree, this is an important story, but right now we are following the policy of a nod being as good as a wink to a blind bat — Ed.)

Russian Fishing Practice

Dear Sir,

Re: Squid Pro Quo. Salient May 15

Regarding S. Thorpe's assertion that "Russia is far from being the worst fishing nation. It has a record of efficiency, cooperation and concern for observing the local regulations," I must take grave exception.

I have no knowledge of the New Zealand experience with the Russian fleets but I can tell you that the outrageous behaviour of Russian fishermen in Canadian waters has led to Russian fishermen being denied port facilities in Canada, and has forced Canadian fishermen to arm their boats in order to dissuade Russian trawlers from slashing their nets, and otherwise trying to terrorize them out of the rich fishing grounds of the Canadian Grand Banks.

This was before the declaration of the 200 mile territorial limit, at a time when everything beyond 12 miles was 'international waters'. The navy repeatedly tried to protect the fishing fleets but the four destroyers and two submarines assigned to East Coast patrol could not be everywhere at once. On one occasion the Russians were actually filmed cutting the trawl lines of a Canadian boat and at that point the government denied them port facilities.

As usual, the Russians showed that the only rules they obey are those of force. Once the government took a hard line with them, they decided to be gentlemen, but until that point seemed interested in doing only what was to their own advantage, rules be damned.

It requires no ideological disagreement with the Russian political system to observe that in international relations, Mother Russia does exactly as she pleases until forcibly stopped by sanctions or threatened military action. This can indeed be called "efficient cooperation" as S. Thorpe asserts, but it carries connotations not normally associated with the word 'cooperation'.

Sincerely,

Doug Thompson.

Zealot Qwerted

Dear Editor,

I would be grateful if your correspondant, Gary Herrington, could explain exactly what he means with his statement 'generally speaking any society which through misguided liberalism allows religious organisations to operate legally is asking for trouble'. This sounds remarkably like a religious zealot speaking.

Signed,

Qwerty Uiop.