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.
Last year the Malaysian High Commissioner, Jack De Silva, made headlines by warning politically active Malaysian students of the consequences that awaited them at home. That threat has now been made reality in the case of Khoo Ee Liam. Khoo was arrested by the security police in the early morning of February 27 at his family home in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia's capital.
Khoo Ee Liam was a private student (as opposed to a Colombo Plan student) at Cinterbury for a number of years. He was an exception among overseas students in that he played an active part in student politics, and was elected to Exec, in
Khoo finally did return to Malaysia in
It is now months since Khoo was arrested. We have had this information for some time but have not published it, hoping that more details would become known. None have, however — nothing is known about what charge Khoo faces, where he is being held, what his condition is, or even if he's still being held. It is rumoured that Khoo was asked to supply a list of politically active Malaysian student in New Zealand, but he refused — thus he was arrested.
The University of Canterbury Student Newspaper, Canta rang the Malaysian High Commission in Wellington and asked to speak to Jack De Silva. His secretary wouldn't accept the call until she knew what we wanted — when told it was about Khoo Ee Liam. She said that De Silva refused to speak to us about it or make any comment. Try ringing De Silva yourself — his office number is Wellington 587-57.
NZUSA has not been idle — led by International Vice-President Alick Shaw, they approached the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on the matter. They received a letter from Mr Norrish. Deputy-Secretary of Foreign Affairs saying that New Zealand had limited resources for finding out about individual political prisoners, but "Mr, Khoo's previous association with New Zealand makes this case an exception. I have therefore asked our High Commissioner in Kuala Lumpur to make enquiries and we will let you know when we hear from him." So far nothing has been heard Alick Shaw tried to speak to De Silva, hut was told that De Silva refused to see or speak to anyone from NZUSA. Dave Cuthbert, former Canterbury and NZUSA President, now STB Director, went to Kuala Lumpur late last month in an attempt to see Khoo and Justice Ministry officials to discuss the case.
New Zealand has close links with Malaysia. Our soldiers fought there in the "Malayan Emergency", our soldiers were there in the "confrontation" against Indonesia, our soldiers are still stationed in Malaysia and Singapore. Not long ago the local media reported that Malaysian Army personnel were in Christchurch to buy Labrador dogs to train as "people-sniffers" to find "terrorists" in the jungle. There are close trade links. New Zealanders like to think of Malaysia as a democratic society, one which they helped to save from Communism. The reality of Malaysia is quite different — it is as near as makes no difference to being a fascist stale. Khoo's case proves that De Silva's statements last year were promises, not threats — it is obvious that Khoo's arrest and De Silva's activities are not unconnected. Khoo has been arrested after being back in Malaysia for some time — no details are known apart from that fact that he was arrested. The New Zealand representatives of the Malaysian Government refuse to say anything. De Silva and the Malaysian Government must be forcefully told that the students of this country have a right to know all relevant details of the detention of one of their former members. Furthermore, it must be made clear that Khoo Ee Liam, now held as a political prisoner, must be freed.
Salient rang the Malaysian High Commission to enquire about Khoo. Mr de Silva was in conference, be; his secretary said he might ring us back. He didn't. When we rang later he was out, they said, and was very busy. They put us onto Mr Zainol who handles student matters. He didn't know anything, he said, laughing. We didn't know about Khoo until somebody rang us, he said, also finding this funny. He had heard nothing from Malaysia on Khoo, he said, and could not comment on the arrest's complications for other Malaysian students in New Zealand.
Kids ran wild in the Union Hall on Monday while their parents and other concerned students held a forum to discuss the lack of creche facilities in the university. The forum was needed to hear grievances so that they could be presented to the University Council later that afternoon.
Dissatisfaction with the creche situation has been building up for years now, since it was first felt that the University's Fairlie Terrace creche was inadequate. An overflow creche was set up last year in the Memorial Theatre Foyer by the Students' Association, but it believes the responsibility for running creches lies with the university, and it won't operate the overflow creche on a permanent basis.
The strongest feeling that came from the forum was that responsibility for creches ultimately lie with the government, who through the university, should pay for staff training and salaries, grants for setting up creches and for the expenses of parents who could not afford creche charges. Government members are still divided on the necessity of creches and need constant reminding that creches throughout the country are hopelessly inadequate. A long-term solution for Victoria's problem is to have a community-university creche serving the students and parents of the Kelburn-Te Aro area.
Some felt the university should see any money it spent on the creche not as a handout but as an 'investment'. More parents could return to study if there were proper creche facilities. These people would be highly motivated and more likely to be successful students.
Parents thought the Students' Association should contribute towards a creche because they were paying fees and getting nothing back as they could not attend other activities. An executive member explained that the creche costs $1000 to run plus $1500 in cleaning costs. This is a quarter of what is spent on sport and cultural clubs and yet student-parents are less than a quarter of the total student population.
The Students' Association should not always have to pay for the creche as this sets a dangerous precedent. Already there have been moves by the University Council to make the Students' Association pay for welfare services, which should be solely the responsibility of the University itself. Although the Association will keep its creche going as long as it is needed, it should not thereby enable the university and government to avoid their responsibility.
The most important point that was brought up was the welfare of the children involved. The most formative years of the child's life are the first five and the creches, when the children can get to them, cannot at present provide the necessary stimulus. The present situation also places a physical and mental strain on the parents, and makes full-time studies impossible.
Faults of the two creches were detailed by dissatisfied parents. The Theatre Foyer creche is not only too small but is also dangerous. At mid-day all the equipment has to be packed away, which limits the items that can be kept and is an extra task for the overworked staff. There are also restrictions on the children's play because the foyer might become too messy.
Problems at the Fairlie Terrace Creche are as bad. Already understaffed, this will worsen because another staff member is leaving next week. It is necessary to book an hour at a time with a basic six hours allowed weekly. After that each extra hour has to be booked seperately, making consecutive hours difficult to get. Travelling time is another inhibiting factor. Walking, from varsity to Fairlie Terrace, with a small child can take half an hour and is tiring for the parent as well as the child, trying to get back to pick up the child after a lecture within the allotted hour is impossible. With long labs, science students have to arrange for someone else to collect their child.
One of the solutions is to use a vacant house at 26 Kelburn Parade. The Social Welfare Department has checked the building and said it would be suitable if two conditions are met. A fence at the front must be build to provide protection from the main road and part of the car-park at the back will have to be a playing area.
Before the forum ended parents were asked to go along to the Council meeting to help re-enforce the points the Student Representative would be making. The final suggestion was 'take the kids along to lectures and remind the university that adequate creches are needed now.'
So there were children at the University Council's monthly meeting on Monday afternoon. The members were patently aware of the children's presence' and procedure was adjusted to allow Student Representative Lisa Sacksen to speak as early as possible. Lisa Sacksen reported what the lunchtime forum had said. She added that by not providing proper facilities the university was discriminating against women. Until our society changes, most of the responsibility for caring for children is on the mother. By not providing creches this stops mothers doing a full-time course. By having a charge for creche services there is also an element of economic discrimination because some students cannot afford it.
The Council closed the matter by expressing its concern and referring the matter to the Standing Committee which will meet in three weeks time.
Last Friday, a large audience attended a debate/forum on the subject, "Jesus Christ: Superstar or Supermyth" in the Union Hal).
The audience may have felt that they were witnessing neither debate nor forum, but a combined lecture from Professors Pouwer (Anthropology), Munz (History), Geering (Religious Studies) and Mr lorns (of the Philosophy Department).
Pouwer spoke first, but his contribution, couched in anthropological jargon, was probably too esoteric for most of the audience. One point, discernible in an otherwise aimless speech was that myth was the means by which man can know the unknowable.
Professor Munz (whose earlier announcement of his resignation as Head of the History Department had evoked uninhibited applause, from someone in the audience) although purporting to have viewed the subject in its simplest form, clarified nothing. Speaking on the interpretation of the resurrection, he said the pivotal question was; the resurrection, myth or fact? While unwilling to commit himself to a definite answer, Munz did conclude that in resolving this question, in historical terms, the Gospels were of no use. (Jolly good point, old chap)
The third speaker was Professor Geering, whose main point appeared to be that Jesus Christ, Superstar and Supermyth (for to be the first he also had to fulfil the requirements of the second) had, throughout history, few serious rivals. Geering identified these as: Buddha, Mohammed, and Karl Marx. He countered Munz's questioning of the resurrection by saying that this 'pure' myth, was outside the scope of an historian
At this point the first in a series of interjections and questions that disrupted the sterile lecture format the "debate/forum" had assumed, was made by Roger Steele. He angrily denounced the speakers academic approach as being irrelevant sophistry. His question was: what is the relevance of Christianity, its myth or superstardom, or whatever, to the present social situation.
Geering, continued, only after prompting from Munz, in vague terms about the 'myth' of Marxism.
John lorns had little to say except to criticise the other speakers. Not surprisingly then, his response to a later question, was that he was still having difficulty deciding the reality of objects around him.
During question time, Roger Steele repeated his question concerning Christianity today. Steele's claim of motivation by the the 'class struggle' was adequate provocation to Munz. Blandly he trotted out the" tired old jokes: if Steele is concerned with class struggle, why is he sitting around smoking cigarettes, etc. The audience tittered. However David Tripe's "boring" speech, to illustrate the shallowness of what the panel had said was not so well received. The forum concluded, having degenerated into an erudite discussion of reality and truth. Roger Steele's question remained unanswered, by the evasive panel.
The speakers would have departed further entrenched in their apparent belief that dialogue with the "impolite" student left is impossible. The majority of the audience would have gone away with similar sentiments.
I left, feeling pessimistic, about the apathy of the students present. It seems members of the academic staff, when lecturing or condescending to attend a "debate" or "forum" are expected to be listened to attentively. However if what they are pontificating on is challenged, as Roger Steele and David Tripe "dared" to do, the interjector is not accorded the same treatment.
It might be cosy for ivory tower academics to sit around debating the ins and outs of the ressurrection, in a atmosphere of self-indulgent back patting.
However if they must discuss Christ then surely the most pressing topic is his pertinence to today's social problems.
The Executive meeting held last Wednesday was to say the least, interesting. Some important matters were raised concerning the Kelburn Park Pavilion, the food co-op, and the competence of the VUWSA President.
The first matter raised concerned a reveller at the capping festivities who was seen taking away two dozen cans of beer during the dance (40 dozen in all disappeared during the event, due to insufficient security). This individual later threw a party at which 14 dozen cans of beer were distributed. When asked where he bought these, he gave the name of a tavern which later enquiries showed did not stock this type of beer. The matter is proceeding.
Shortly after taking office, the President, John McDonald was asked to express student feeling on aid to the Thieu Government in a letter to the Prime Minister. Letters from the President of the Association are intended to convey student feeling, and where that feeling is strong the letter should be forcible, They are important in that they are likely to be among the only independent, well researched, and provocative point of view that government gets.
A copy of the letter was read at the meeting. A dismayed Gyles Beekford criticised McDonald's letter for its vagueness, superficiality and lack of coherence. Lisa Sacksen compared the letter with copies of the previous President's correspondence, and it was obvious to all present that McDonald's letter was unquestionably inferior in strength, clarity and depth of argument.
Gyles noted that the letter was written without the assistance of the Executive, and asked for a strong protest to be entered in the minutes. Mr McDonald was unable to formulate a coherent reply to the criticism.
Lisa then produced the latest MSSA newsletter, whose editorial reported racist comments by one of McDonald's scrutineers during the counting of election votes. The Executive asked the president to write letters to all overseas students' groups disassociating himself from the remarks.
The next item was the Food Co-op. which required considerable funds to pay off, debts from last year. It was felt necessary to raise subs to $10. to he refunded at the end of the year, for reasons explained in the the recent food co-op newsletter — gel one from the Studass Office.
Lisa Sacksen then criticised Mr McDonald for the way he handled last Tuesday's Middle East Forum. In this forum a speaker was invited without the approval or knowledge of the Executive. Only the Jewish point of view was expressed (which, oddly enough, is the point of view supported by McDonald.) The speaker is the President of the Australasian Jewish Students' Club, and has been travelling throughout Australia. Before a speaker can address a student meeting on campus he must be cleared by the Executive or an affiliated club. There is no affiliated Jewish club in Victoria University, and since Mr McDonald did not even notify the Executive of his intention, let alone get permission, his action was illicit. In fact, the Secretary of VUWSA, Lisa Sacksen, said: "The action is wholly unconstitutional. I am sure that you (McDonald) are taking sides."
Mr McDonald's excuse was that the speaker had been introduced by a friend, and had thought that it would be useful to have him address a forum. There were two replies to this statement — from Lisa Sacksen, who commented". "The President of our association appears to have a different policy from the association itself," and from the VUWSA Welfare Officer, Peter Aagaard, who said that McDonald "is very biased in his chairmanship, makes too many snide comments, and should be seen to be more impartial."
McDonald has by no means revealed his true colours yet but the criticisms and allegations made at last week's exec meeting showed that already the executive has totally lost confidence in him. How long he will continue to enjoy the students' confidence is for them to decide.
Are you baffled, confused, or exasperated about anything? If so, Contact is the place to go. The staff there can refer you to the appropriate people for inquiries about legal aid, landlords, etc. They also have information on rail and bus timetables, maps of the city and a hell of a lot of other miscellaneous information.
The hours are from 10am to 3pm which is the time most students are on campus. The office is situated on the student union building on the second floor, with a telephone if you can't be bothered walking down from the library or other buildings. The staff are sincere, friendly people who are willing to help (which is quite rare at Vic at the moment). Most students appear to be aware of its existence and seem to have the idea that Contact is where you go if you don't know something.
On the surface it would seem that such an organisation would be a valuable service to students. An ideal set-up to deal with those niggly little problems which arise now and again.
Why is it then, that an average of five students per day use Contact? I can think of four possible reasons why this is so:
However, aside from attempting to offer reasons why Contact is not used, the situation is that the staff are considering closing it down.
The question of Contact's continuance or dissolution will be brought up at the next SRC on Thursday, so if you have any ideas relating to Contact be there to give them.
Thursday night of this week is one of
What are going to be the highlights of
You may possibly remember that at
And that is starting to get near to the real point that should be made about the budget. The Labour Government, which is mistakenly described in certain circles as being "socialist", is hardly likely to attack the capitalist system in such a way that price inflation would be eliminated. It would be quite impossible for the party which openly supports the interests of manufacturers (as opposed to the National Party which restricts itself to big manufacturers) to attack inflation, when the cause of inflation is within the capitalist order. But as we learn from the Chilean example, no government elected in a bourgeois democracy can use the fact of its election to institute socialism.
And now to describe the state of the economy on Friday morning, and for the year after that, as a result of the budget. Even without increased milk prices and electricity charges, the minimum rate of inflation is probably 15%, but these price increases might well bump it up (i.e. the minimum) to 16 or 17%. I'm sure Mr Rowling would not find an increase in the rate of inflation of 7% to be significant. The only way the capitalist economic system can stifle inflation is by the type of mass unemployment that was experienced in the
The exciting feature of the budget, according to Friday morning's Dominion, will most likely be the replacement (if only partial) of the import licensing system by tariff controls. This may arouse a few squeals from a few manufacturers to the effect that workers will lose their jobs, which is part of the image they are trying to establish for themselves of supporting workers' interests. It is also part of the National Party sponsored campaign to discredit the Labour Party as anti-working class — which of course they are, but not for the same reasons as the National Party would suggest. But a change from import licensing to tariffs would most likely make no appreciable difference to the situation of working people.
And thus to the net effects of the budget. There will be continuing inflation at an ever-increasing rate, with prices of houses, and rents leading the way, as usual. Working people will continue to be ripped of by their bosses, and by all the manufacturers of everything (National or Labour Party aligned). Changing the government after all, is only changing the colour of the tie of the man whose system rips you off.
Stop Press: Hugh Watt decided to jump the gun in respect of electricity charges, by announcing an increase of 5% on Monday afternoon. But what's a variation of an odd one or two percent in a rate of inflation!
"my silence must be understood as respect for you" A weekend with PauloFreire
Professor Paulo Freire is an educationalist whose main concern has been with adult literacy campaigns in Brazil and Chile, where literacy is both linguistic and political. Through the means of learning language — speaking, reading and writing — we come to know, interpret and understand our world. In these terms, education at any level is political, whether or not educator and/or pupil explicitly acknowledge it.
Freire has been in New Zealand for the last two weeks and from May 10 — 12 a seminar was held in Auckland by the educational section of the World Council of Churches in New Zealand.
It was a big seminar — about 200 people in all — and as such limited in its potential for dialogue. There were ministers, educationalists, pupils, social workers, academics and other interested people: It was not all white middle class, but the atmosphere was so.
The first evening was spent having a meal and listening to an introductory talk from Paulo Freire, mainly autobiographical. He comes from a middle class family in Brazil, although he experienced poverty and hunger during the depression.
Throughout the seminar there was considerable pressure on him to act as guru, as seer (which he resisted very strongly and successfully) — to act as the arrogant middle class educator which the title of Professor leads us to expect — to prescribe for us whose experience he didn't know.
People were confused by his silence, variously interpreting it as boredom, laziness, lack of caring. Finally he stood to justify his silence as respect for us, saying "I am very interested in continuing to listen to you in my silence."
The Saturday morning was taken up with a panel discussion chaired by Tony McPherson, a professor of education at Auckland University. The panel was made up of teachers, one pupil, an industrialist, and a trade unionist.
Much of their time was spent reliving the Education Development Conference in discussing whether or not Maori language should be taught compulsorily in schools, whether or not Samoan should be, etc. There were several vociferous young Maoris who would not be silenced, thereby causing embarrassment to some.
The industrialist pointed out the distinction between education and job training, where the latter ought to be provided by the employer, perhaps through technical institutes. He said that the employer was interested in true education, by which he meant character building. Education also provides the basic tools of the two languages English and Mathematics. He added that he was "all in favour of a great deal of cultural instruction". It was difficult to see how all this relates to factories such as Todd Motors Alex Harvey Industries, etc (where it is freely acknowledged that only the Polynesians will do the worst jobs).
The learning of the two languages — English and Mathematics — was reinterpreted by a member of the Black Power Gang in Wellington as being a) the ability to understand orders and reply to them (English); and b) the ability to understand pay packets (Maths).
The conference then broke into discussion groups focussing on points raised in the "fishbowl" for an hour or so, and these reported back in the early afternoon. This seemed to be just like EDC discussion indeed I doubt if anyone could tell the difference — maybe some didn't want to. This may be because 'education' was taken to be a word referring only to schools and universities, and the system of social relations within them Where community was mentioned, it was synonymous with the parents of the children presently in those school.
During this discussion, the statement was made several times that school children are New Zealand's most oppressed group. If one thinks as Freire does, that education ought to be a dialectic process of experiencing reality, reflecting on that experience, and acting on that reflection; and if the schools prohibit this, then children are are oppressed.
But it we think of education as part of everyone's experience, then education oppression refers to a much greater group of people, of which school children may be members, This is the step which the seminar did not make, despite some demands lot it. A voluntary community social worker in Auckland, Mrs Betty Wark, tried to suggest this to the seminar by asking who'd heard of TPZ and their work, and thus pointing to the existence of oppressed people outside schools. But blank stares were her reward.
Because this kind of argument was accepted (i.e school children are the most oppressed) the seminar got incredibly oppressed down in considering alternative schools. One in particular, a secondary school in Richmond Road. Ponsonby was considered because there were 14 pupils, three teachers and onlookers from that school (cf. two pupils front all other schools). Certainly the pupils from this school seemed freer than their State school counterparts, but this does not alter the fact that these schools are elitist. It's rather like saying that people who go to our private hospitals come out looking more healthy, pink-cheeked and more rested than those who go to our public hospitals.
There was also some discussion of teaching children to make the choice between material and spiritual values; of liberation meaning feeling with the heart not thinking with the head.
(Later on Freire said that practice and theory were inseparable, and constitute a dynamic unity. If they are separated we have neither real theory or real practice; such that "false theory is blah, blah, blah and false practice is activism". I wondered if he was referring to this latter discussion.)
About 20 people got really pissed off with this academic stuff and walked out making everyone remaining uneasy
This didn't last long however because we came to the part of the seminar concerned with "where do we go from here" people decided to form an organisation — an education action group — to serve oppressed students. Almost everyone there decided to put their names down on a piece of paper to join this organisation.
Overall I found the seminal disappointing in that it failed to realise the collective potential of main of the people who were there, who did not feel they could speak against and or instead of the school teachers.
It was however really stimulating to meet a man who realises his philosophy, in his relations with, other people in an honest way. I think for some at least it hardened our impatience at an academic, predominantly verbal way of experiencing reality — as opposed to an active experiencing mode coupled with reflection.
This article was written by the General Secretary of the Student Teachers' Association of New Zealand and is reprinted from their journal. Clamant.
I have found few books as profoundly moving as the works of Paulo Freire; Cultural Action for Freedom and Pedagogy of the Oppressed. They are moving not only in the sense of being emotionally and intellectually satisfying, but but also in that they are motivationally stimulating, inspiration. For, Freire's books are not merely treatises of educational theory: they are also attempts to explain the source and the immense success of Freire's educational practice.
Paulo Freire is a 52-year-old Brazilian from the provincial city of Recife in the north-east of that country. As a child he knew hunger — and its effects on schooling. At the age of 11 he committed himself to a struggle against hunger, so that other children would not have to know the same agony. He soon recognised that the supposed helplessness of the poor was the result of the social structure. His realisation that the people were discouraged from becoming critically aware of the cayse of their plight and that the school system was one of the major means of their repression turned his interest towards education. How could education begin to break down the "culture of silence" instead of enforcing it?
Freire's philosophy was first expressed in his doctoral dissertation at the University of Recife. It continued to develop while, as Professor of the History and Philosophy of Education at the same university, he began to experiment with the teaching of illiterates. A method known as "alfabetization" was the result of this theory and practice. Many people concerned with the welfare of the poor, including the Catholic Church, began to use Freire's method in literacy campaigns throughout the north-east of Brazil. However, the method not only taught people to read and write in a surprisingly short time, it also taught them to critically appraise their world. The Latin American peasant has much to be critical about.
In
Freire spent
Paulo Freire acts as Education Consultant to the World Council of Churches in Geneva. The Churches Christian Education Commission of New Zealand sponsored a visit by Freire this month. The Student Teachers' Association of New Zealand arranged a three day programme in Christchurch for interested student teachers and teachers college staff.
The Freire method, it must be remembered, does not aim solely or even chiefly at adult literacy. The major concern is to awaken consciousness: in the Portuguese "conscientizacao". This means making the illiterates aware of their potential and dignity, and enabling them to perceive more realistically the world in which they live, the causes and consequences of events in their lives.
The method stems from three sources. Firstly, the language, culture and problems of the illiterates themselves are taken into account. Before any teaching is undertaken with any particular population it is informally and closely observed, its attitudes, aspirations and peculiarities noted. A list of words most charged with meaning for the community is drawn up. Secondly, to balance this subjective study of the illiterates, the method draws on studies and analyses of underdevelopment and poverty. Thirdly, philosophies of knowledge, human nature, culture and history provide a more complete picture of man his needs and potential. This component gives direction to the method.
The list of words is reduced to between 16 and 20 by two further criteria: (i) how useful are they in learning the range of vowels and consonants and as keys to a larger, more complex vocabulary; (ii) their capacity to confront social realities and mean something important to the illiterates. For example, the word for "work" in Spanish, "trabajo", covers a number of sounds and as well as meaning "occupation" connotes of the nature of human existence, economic functions, co-operation and unemployment.
A set of cards with pictures relating to the chosen words is constructed with a view to impressing an image of the word on the pupil and stimulating thinking about the situation the word implies. For example the first card of set produced for a Chilean rural group depicted a peasant carrying an axe to cut down a tree. From this simple illustration, with a minimum of assistance (mostly in the form of questions and invitations from the "co-ordinator" to the less vocal members of the circle) it was hoped that the following point would emerge from the group...there is a world of nature and a world of culture, through work man alters the natural environment and creatively forms culture.
The second picture is of a folk-dance. Through it the group can learn man employs culture for aesthetic reasons, not just to survive. The third picture shows a humble Chilean home inhabited by a working class family. It is at this stage that the literacy training begins for this particular group. The class learns that one can symbolise a lived experience by drawing, writing or reading it.
The literacy training involves a number of audio-visual techniques familiar enough to New Zealand teachers but placed in a context quite unusual to us. At the same time as the group are repeating and memorising words, breaking them into Component syllables, learning to write letters, learning to write words and constructing new words from the components, the co-ordinator of the group guides them in reflection and discussion. For example, from the meaning of the word "house" such themes as the need for comfortable housing for family life, the problems of housing in the nation and the problems of housing associated with urbanisation are developed. Provocative questions such as "where and why do Chileans lack housing?" help to generate critical attitudes in place of apathy.
The circles, as they are called, need to be assisted by someone trained in the method. The co-ordinator must not force his viewpoint on the group but rather help the illiterates to form their own opinions through dialogue. Dialogue is brought about by the co-ordinator asking provocative questions and drawing less vocal members of the circle-into the discussion.
Thomas G. Sanders says of those brought out of the culture of silence by this method "My own most memorable impression from having visited these classes is of the capacity of people of limited education for thoughtful analysis and logical articulation of issues when those issues are linked to their everyday life."
You can understand the threat felt by the Brazilian oligarchy when you realise that "conscientizacao" takes less than three months to complete (and this after a days work in the fields). At the rate the method was catching on in
I imagine most readers will probably have asked one or two questions by now "Its rather political isn't it?" and "But what does this have to do with New Zealand, a country with near universal literacy?"
In my mind the two questions are related. If you asked the first one it seems to me that you lack the critical awareness Freire tries to foster. You assume education can be other than political. If you asked the second question, the answer is that that the method does not aim solely or even chiefly at literacy; the primary goal is critical awareness among the masses.
There is a considerable amount of evidence that the masses in this country lack critical awareness with regard to social issues. The content and quality of our media is one example, Newspapers offer very little in-depth reporting and news analysis. When asking questions of speakers, New Zealanders van be fobbed off with the most obvious non-answers and diversions. We have an unhealthy submissiveness towards authority. Look at the response Mr Kirk's promises concerning Bikies met with last election, or Truth's campaign to birch bashers. Most significant of all is the lack of action on the part of the people. Freine's critical awareness brings an end to the culture of silence: that is why we most look for lessons in his method
Freire insists there is no such thing as a neutral education. Either education is for domestication or it is for liberation Either it seeks to cast you in the mould of the established order or it equips you to critically and creatively appraise and transform reality. The initial choice, claims Freire, lies with the educator, for while no one can liberate someone else, neither can liberating education be experienced alone.
Two styles of teaching correspond to domestication and liberation — the banking approach and the problem-solving method. New Zealand is undoubtedly committed to the former. We foster an education system where an all-knowing teacher deposits information in the students head for the student to withdraw a! examination time. We do this at the expense of understanding and of developing critical awareness. The result is dependence, submissiveness, an orientation low-aids 'having' rather than 'being' feelings of inferority and insignificance..... Problem-solving education, as alfabetization has shown us can transform the ignorant, superstitious and passive into men and women aware of their own dignify and potential, In the words of one peasant:
"Before this words meant nothing to me, now they speak to me and I make them speak."
In problem-solving education the teacher must learn to become a teacher who is also a student, and must let his pupils become students who also teach. The teacher student does not deposit knowledge but by dialogue names the problem and searches for solutions. There is no point in attempting dialogue between oppressor and oppressed as this only afford the oppressor further opportunities to dominate. Dialogue is only for those who approach each other as equals.
Freire's books are testimonies to a faith in the power of people and dialogue.
Cultural Action for Freedom: Paulo Freire, Penguin Education.
Pedagogy of the Oppressed: Paulo Freire, Penguin Education.
Literacy Training and Conscientisation; paper presented by Thomas G. Sanders. Conference on Development Education, Canberra,
Salient reporter, Colin Feslier, talks to Bishop Patelisio Finau of Tonga.
Salient: What do you see as Tonga 's social and economic position at the moment?
Finau: Economically we are very dependent on overseas aid and I cannot sec us being self-reliant for many years to come unless we learn to work with what we already have, rather than patterning ourselves on western development.
Would if be fair to describe Tonga as a feudal country?
Yes, very much so.
Do you feel Tonga is moving away from feudalism?
Well, I feel it is moving very slowly away from the feudal system, but there is pressure from a sort of middle class. These people have had a better education and may have done well in the business line. So besides the nobility and the mass of the people, there is group in between that is getting very noticeable, because of their education and the wealth they have obtained through this. I think this is a sign that Tonga is becoming more democratic as this pressure group grows and makes itself fell, but otherwise there is resistance to change and pressure to preserve feudalism and all its consequences. Unless there are opportunities for the Tongan people to build a real democratic society, where the people have more say in government, and places for people who were not just born into power, we will have difficulties in the future.
What wilt the reaction of Tonga's 'feudal elite' be to attempts to change the social structure of Tonga? Can you sec them giving up their power willingly ?
Historically, we have yet to see a feudal system give way to a more democratic form that gives more power to the people peacefully. The normal reaction is to tighten your hold and the people as a whole experience greater oppression. I hope, and I pray that there is still time to bring understanding, and I think this is the job of the Church, to bring the ruling class to a human understanding, a Christian understanding of the brotherhood of man and man, especially of the same race, and to really live the Christianity we preach — concern for your brother, not only material concern, but concern that my brother and your brother is able to make decisions, to think for himself, to help others. I doubt very much whether the people who rule in Tonga at the moment would give more say, more power to the great mass of the people. I doubt, yet I am a Christian and I hope. Therefore I do what I can to bring this about. Men have human hearts, they are human beings and I think we should be working towards this brotherhood of man, not only in words, but in practice.
Do you feel that tourism has a role in the development of Tonga?
Tourism certainly brings in money which helps our people, especially through the local industries of mat and tapa making, basket weaving, carving and so on. In this way money comes to "the little people" and at the same time helps them to educate their children. From the economic point of view this is better than what we have had but we are also very much aware that tourism brings in other problems. I think in the western world people are very much aware and fearful of being enslaved and oppressed by materialism and I fear that our people can make the mistake of thinking that the only think that matters is getting money. I hope that we do become aware of the spiritual and moral issues surrounding tourism and that we do something about it.
Would you then discourage mass sightseeing tourism?
Yes, I would discourage it because I think that people coming in like that do have not have a good appreciation and understanding of Tonga. They come out of the plane and run around taking pictures, pass through a few villages, see a dance or two on a marae. How much of Tonga can they understand? What really happens is that we put on a show for them, and the show is not the real Tonga. I feel there is much to be gained by people visiting our country in other ways, especially by people in VSA work. They have a tremendous understanding of the place compared with day tourists who are the majority of people visiting Tonga. It lakes time to understand people and places, and it works both ways. Our people need lime to appreciate the visitors.
You mentioned aid from overseas as being very important to Tonga's development for some time to come. What sort of aid do you need?
I would say aid that helps people to understand their local situation better, to appreciate what they have and then to try to develop themselves personally and materially, along the lines of their own aims — they must control what they are aiming at rather than just putting a lot of money into so-called western development. Development along western lines has been tried in many developing and Third World countries and doesn't seem to work, just running after something that's impossible for the people. This happened in Tanzania where people thought if only we work hard we will be developed as the countries in Europe'. They worked ten times as hard and they find themselves poorer today than when they started. I think we have-to appreciate our own situation, work with what we have and try to develop. We cannot hope to ape western development as in Australia and New Zealand — we have to rind our own standard because when it comes to raw materials, we just don't have any. The people know we haven't got it but we have to do what we can. Aid from overseas could go on research. We must really find out the things which are conducive to our own development rather than just trying to produce goods, for we find that that there are no markets or that countries generally do not want what we have a surplus of. I think it is such a vast question, there is a need for some sort of co-ordinating body, so that when you produce this or that item, there is a market for them.
What was your reaction to the recent arrests in Auckland of Tongans?
My reaction? I think it did not befit New Zealand. I think I know a bit about New Zealand, and to act like that was unbelievable, not like the New Zealand I grew up to understand. The arrests were something foreign to New Zealand. The reaction of the people at home was a mixed one and they began to fear New Zealand. The majority of the people knew little of New Zealand, just that it was 'out there somewhere' and was a place to get work. When a thing like this happens I would say that the first reaction is fear. Some people in Tonga were up in arms about this, they did not like these few Tongans making a bad name for Tonga. They come and misbehave in New Zealand and therefore Tonga is not liked in New Zealand. So I would say this is a real mixed reaction.
Do you feel that there will be Tongans coming to New Zealand for some time?
I am praying and hoping that New Zealand will be open enough to receive Tongans both on temporary permits and as permanent citizens. I feel that this is a part of the aid that New Zealand can give us. The opportunity for work in New Zealand seems to be great so the people coming from the Islands are not taking jobs from New Zealanders. They are helping to boost New Zealand's trade and I hope that the opportunity will be there for people to come over a longer term period, at least six months, so that, after payment of expenses, fares, board and so on, the people can go back home with a hand to climb with, to try to do something for themselves. Aid is not just given to him because he has worked worked hard — I feel that most of the people who do come over do work hard — and the feeling of human dignity, the feeling that you have achieved something, you say now that you've got this money, you can do something when you go home whether it is to build a house for yourself, a better house, more in line with the dignity of a man, or to do what many of them do and go back and open a little shop or buy a taxi, or catch more fish for the market. I feel with this money which they earn they can make decisions, decisions responsible for their life, something which they never had before. Before they had to depend so much on relatives — assisted in a way that independence is impossible. Living together, they depend on one another, living on another man's properly. In such conditions you are not able to be a real master, responsible for yourself to develop yourself, materially and by implication, spiritually as well.
What sort of aid is New Zealand giving to Tonga, at the moment?
Well, I think whether you realise it or not, immigration, people coming in to work, although at present New Zealand does not give Tongans permits to work, is a form of aid. New Zealand does give money to Tonga — I believe there is some promise of giving money to build a new Parliament building for Tonga. I question very much whether this is real aid, whether it is a priority. When you look at the number of things to be done in Tonga, a feudal country, you put up a Parliament. New Zealand could give money to various projects in agriculture but I feel it should be more than that. There should be research made into this kind of aid, on the part of New Zealand to find out whether this aid would be really beneficial to many people in Tonga or only a few.
We in Tonga should be trying to make our needs felt, to make our needs known by the people who come to negotiate with our Government. I think also at the same time there should be consideration for the social system that we have. The kind of separation between church and state, so that the church is not allowed to speak 'so-called 'secular' subjects. There is the feeling mat it's the job of government. I feel that delegations from New Zealand should make it their business to speak to various groups in Tonga and not just the government, because I feel they do not always provide the overall good for the Majority of our people, but rather hold on to the present set-up and try to keep that going.
I hope that New Zealand will be able to accept Tongans as permanent residents, because when you consider the lack of land and employment these people have a right to migrate from Tonga. I believe that the government is not at all pleased with this, and of course it's natural for a government in a feudal system to be concerned because it might find itself with no serfs, no servants. I think it's up to countries like New Zealand, democratic and concerned for human dignity and rights, to open themselves to the people of countries in less fortunate situations.
What do you see as the role of foreign investment in Tonga?
In the past overseas investment was discouraged in Tonga because of the protective clauses made by the government and I think that in many ways these were good measures. They were designed to protect the interests of Tonga and its people and to stop any wealth that Tonga may have being drained off. Now the big firms for example, Maurice Hedstrom and Burns Philip are in Tonga and there seems to be an casing of these restrictions so as to encourage outside investment. 1 would like to see good studies made of this especially by Tonga itself — we should make studies of the type of investment that would benefit us in Tonga — find out what we need and see if these people are interested and encourage them to invest in Tonga.
One of the great contributions that New Zealand and other aiding countries could make to the Islands is to use some of this money to research what type of investment would benefit us to develop more in our own way rather than repeating the same project going on in New Zealand or Australia.
I feel that governments involved in investments in the Islands should move along these lines of research. If this aid is to be true aid it must be the so-called aid that profits the 'aiding' countries or companies at the expense of the people of the country receiving the aid. What we should really mean by aid is helping a poor fellow human. I think there is both a human dimension and a Christian dimension — are you going to help yourself, or help your poor brother out there to try and help himself to better his condition? And in time the people should not only run but they should also own the concern that has been set up.
Do you see very much possibility of companies undertaking such investment?
With a human heart, with a Christian heart, the impossible becomes possible. Can we just leave it for our Marxist friends to do it for us?
Recent years have seen much controversy over the Pacific Island fruit trade. Allegations of malpractice have centred on New Zealand Fruit Distributors Ltd, sole importers of Island fruit David Shand's report commissioned by the worried Labour Government on the banana trade studied some of the problems involved. To examine some issues left unresolved, Brendan Smith interviewed Mr Walker, Managing-Director of New Zealand Fruit Distributors Ltd.
Salient: How was Fruit Distributors set up as a monopoly company?
Mr Walker: After the war there was a lot of public dissatisfaction over a constant shortage of fruit. Many believe this was a major factor why the Labour Government went out of office in
So who are the shareholders of Fruit Distributors?
The shareholders are the fruit merchants in the country who act at agents for us. We have nothing to do with the retail price of fruit whatsoever. The Price Tribunal fixes the retail price after we advise what our top wholesale price will be.
What is the basis of Fruit Distributors operations?
Fruit Distributors are sole importers of all citrus fruits, bananas and pineapples and we distribute this fruit throughout New Zealand.
The basis of Fruit Distributors is to provide an adequate supply of imported fruit and sell it at reasonable prices. At present the company can't maintain high profits and can only pay shareholders a very limited dividend.
Are you satisfied with the quality of fruit from the Pacific Islands?
Certainly not Biggest problem we've got... Strangely enough the company suffers heavy losses on Island fruit and has to charge more for fruit from other sources to subsidise the Islands.
Unfortunately, the Island people to whom we pay very big prices indeed on world standards, regard us as rather naughty domineering people, while the people who we make the profits from to pay the Islanders think we're the best friends they've got because we're good to deal with.
Do you personally think the Pacific Islanders can produce batter quality fruit?
I certainly don't I No, under the present set-up the Islanders can't produce perishable commodities up to the quality demanded by the New Zealand housewife.
Take the Cook Islands....Well, there are no plantations of any volume in the Cook Islands — fragmented places, very few professional growers. Now the growing of any produce today demands a man who has become an expert in that business. He must produce the fruit of a standard. Mrs Buyer is satisfied with and at an economic price. In the Cooks I think their future in fruit is very much tied up with the constant utilisation of the factory — growing fruit which can be used on the spot. The fruit which has to be held for a few days, then shipped under difficult conditions, sometimes no ships for a month.....is not a satisfactory thing.
Samoa — well, Samoa has grown a lot of bananas over various periods....a very fluctuating sort of supply. But again the soil conditions are not suited for the growing of the crop such as bananas which require considerable handling, accurate shipping dates and must be a strong fruit to go through distribution processes — not always under best circumstances. They pack the bananas in carts with no springs and sit on them. So the fruit is not a satisfactory marketable proposition particularly when it has to carry the very high costs involved today.
A case of bananas from Samoa...we don't know, what the grower gets because we don't deal with the grower. The freight and wharfage....We don't handle them (the boxes), we don't have anything to do with them until they get into our possession when they get into Murchison Stores or as far south as Invercargill. And actually last year our company lost $1 per box on every box of bananas imported. And the economics of the thing demand being able to buy a whole shipload of Ecuadorean bananas. If the quantity from the Islands gets too big we can't do that.
What do you think if the Shand Report on the Island fruit trade?
Well.....Mr Shand...who made a very good report in general on the factual stuff....I think was a little bit out on some of his solutions to the problem. He could have discussed things with us be cause there are other sides to the story.
I'm afraid that the increase in aid for bananas paid now is not going to increase quality. It's going to make the grower pack as much jolly fruit as he can get away with to get the higher price.
Fruit is going to be a much more expensive commodity with attendant costs rising astronomically and the public is going to demand the very highest quality goods for their money, and I'm afraid they can't get quality goods under the present conditions that exist in the Pacific Islands.
Is it, in your opinion, the people themselves who are holding up progress?
Well....it's very hard to do something for people who are nor living in a competitive world. While we buy their goods on fixed price system the scramble is to get the quantity away not the quality.
And the Islanders are not commercial growers in the sense of commercial growers in New Zealand or anywhere else.....he doesn't like advice, you can't do a lot in helping them — I remember a few years ago some university students from Auckland went up to help the Samoans and planted 60 acres of bananas for them. But I don't think they got any bananas off them, I'm afraid. No one bothered about them, the weeds grew up and the banana plants died. And they put a lot of work into that, trying to do something for the people. This doesn't go over.
These people should be really fighting to preserve a market if they are going to stay in the fresh fruit trade. I don't think they can.
I said to the government when they gave this latest aid: 'Why don't you took first to see whether the trade is basically sound — look at soil conditions, diseases, fertilizer use — and then get suitable shipping'.
Ecuadorean bananas have set a standard and its very difficult for these people to come up to that standard. Ecuadorean bananas are grown by Ecuadorans, not by people like companies like United Fruit, they're Ecuadorean owned plantations. Ecuadorean bananas are produced on a competitive basic. I said to Island people today, Samoans and so on — 'If they hadn't got Fruit Distributors operating in the way it does they couldn't sell their bananas I know no trading organisation who would buy them. They wouldn't be able to stand the losses'.
We've done our best, we've spent a lot of money in places like Samoa and the Cook Islands. We've given them a cool-store up in Samoa and a nailing machine in the Cook Islands and a banana dipping machine. We've made gifts of these.
But it's extremely difficult to get cooperation from people...There's a certain lack of integrity.... largely I suppose because they are hard-up and they want to get some more money somehow. They talk about trade not aid, but I'm afraid there's a fair amount of aid goes with the trade.
You are the Ecuadorean Consul in NZ. Surely there is a conflict of interest in having this position and also controlling the Pacific fruit trade?
It's not a very important rank....It's purely an honorary rank. You don't get paid anything. No privileges whatsoever. I was made consul to solve my visa problem. It used to be a country hard to get into.
We get bananas from Ecuador because they grow there in such great quantity. That's why our trade goes there. There's no relationship with my being consul or anything.
What are your thoughts on government aid to the Islands?
We feel that aid was given to these people without much thought for the background of whether the industry is a viable one. I've said that I feel we should have a look at the thing from the fundamental point of view before going on with this thing because we could quite easily encourage through an increase of prices an increase in production which can't be handled.
If you've got no ships what can you do...? And you can't teach them anything. When it comes to growing bananas every man is an expert.
Obviously Walker's statement that Fruit Distributors "have nothing to do with the retail price of fruit whatsoever", is erroneous. In fact the level of the wholesale price is set by the fruit merchants (shareholders of Fruit Distributors) who make their profit from handling the fruit. The level of their fee must affect the Price Tribunal's setting of the retail price. And Walker's cry about only being able to "pay shareholders a very limited dividend". really means that these fruit merchants come in for two grabs at profits from the fruit.
The Ecuadorans I suspect, are happy enough with Fruit Distributors to bestow titles on its boss because Fruit Distributors buys "a whole shipload of bananas" i.e. a nice, clean efficient purchase from a very large producer who can export large amounts.
However, in the Islands, as Walker says, banana growing is a different set up entirely many small growers, unreliable (or at least irregular) shipping, considerable wastage, no guarantees of taking all the fruit that is available through lack of shipping, space, etc — essentially the problems of a small producer.
In this connection it is significant that Walker says: "If the quantity from the Islands gets too big we can't buy whole shiploads of Ecuadorean bananas". Fruit Distributors can only supply Ecuadorean bananas cheaply in New Zealand as long as they get a whole shipload at a time from Ecuador.
And this is the point they start from — Island bananas are only there to make up the required amounts after the shiploads of Ecuadorean bananas have been bought.
It would be embarrassing for Fruit Distributors if the Island production increased, for then Fruit Distributors would have to either buy the Island fruit and wreck the economics of the Ecuadorean supply, or, (more likely), continue the Ecuadorean supply and refuse to buy the extra Island production.
Incidentally the student workcamp referred to was organised in
To return to the main points, it is true that Ecuadorean bananas are cheaper and more profitable for the fruit merchants than Island bananas.
And if the Island producers changed their modes of production to compete with the big Ecuadorean producers it would entail a dramatic restructuring of the Island societies.
Fruit Distributors are only interested in getting the cheapest (and therefore most profitable) bananas to the New Zealand consumer. Using this criteria Ecuadorean bananas are best. Fruit Distributors attitude to the Islands in this matter is "If you want us to buy your bananas, shake yourselves up and produce at a price and quality better than Ecuador."
And I think that Walker is right when he says that the Islands cannot do this a) with their present social structures, and b) because of their small (relative to Ecuador) size of production.
Looking at the question from a purely commercial basis. Fruit Distributors make most money, and even perhaps serve the NZ consumer better, by buying Ecuadorean bananas.
So there are two options with respect to the Islands:
So long as Fruit Distributors are able to treat Ecuador as their primary source and the Islands as a fill up, then there is no incentive for them to move beyond the stage of petty "gifts" to straighten up Island production, transportation etc. Force Fruit Distributors to treat the Islands as the primary source and things might change.
Even then it would probably turn out that because of the economics of scale, social structures, etc, bananas would be more expensive for the New Zealand public than they would be were we to get everything from Ecuador.
But to me this is exactly the sort of cost New Zealand must bear in the interests of economic justice in the world: The time has come when we could write off the small producers (the Islands) because they can't compete with the big producers. This is what Walker does. And he expresses the law of the profit jungle.
New Zealand's commitment to the Islands comes down to the point whether the consumer pays the full cost of the banana directly — if it is regarded as a staple food then it could be subsidised like bread and milk — or from aid funds. To me
Many people are already aware that aid, as practised by great powers such as the United States, is just a modem form of imperialism. But what of New Zealand's aid? Is it any different? The material on these pages is part of research done by NZUSA for a conference on aid earlier this year. Next week we will print the section on aid to Malaysia.
The initial examination of the aid programme of the New Zealand government must centre on four basic issues.
What do we give?
Who do we give it to?
Why do we give it?
What are the results?
The government has provided answers to the first two questions. It would be useful to repeat some of them here. In the year
There are discernable differences in the type of aid given to the Asian states and to the South Pacific countries. This may indicate different motivations, different concerns and and a different level of present New Zealand importance in each region.
Asia is a massive future market for New Zealand goods and services. The biggest single component of our aid to Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia is the commissioning of New Zealand companies and consortiums to study and survey future projects in those countries. During the
The Pacific does not provide the same possibilities for trade at this stage and in any case our foot is very firmly in the door of the South Pacific. Our aid concentrates on things other than technical cooperation; "General Development" accounts for 62% of our aid to that region.
Already 50 to 60 cents of every dollar given as aid is spent in New Zealand. In addition consider the future profits that will accrue to New Zealand when, for example. Air New Zealand flies into a Pacific airport that has been built under the New Zealand aid programme.
The interest of the commercial community in New Zealand's aid programme has been well established. Mr I.H. Stevens of the Auckland Manufacturers Federation speaking at the 1 970 Institute Seminar on "International Aid and the Business Community" described it as "a means of assisting the penetration of new markets". International Aid and the Business Community — Report of a Seminar edited Bruce Brown, NZITA, Ibid.
Clearly the aid programme of the New Zealand government and the activities of an organisation such as ENEX cannot be considered as simple altruism. It is unlikely that New Zealand will take a disinterested approach to aid in the near future. It is therefore a question as to whether the foreign policy and commercial interests of New Zealand are coincidental with the interests of the people of the third world.
In this paper I intend to take three examples of recipient countries and to examine our aid programme to them. Vietnam, Malaysia and the Cook Islands are all countries with whom we have a special relationship and are in the list of the top ten recipients of. New Zealand government aid. General issues are raised on the role of aid when looking at them.
The author of this paper believes that the key to development for the people of any country lies in their independence and upon their ability to rely on their own resources. Aid never won a war on poverty. Only the poor themselves can do that. Are we assisting them or hindering them in their struggle?
Alejandro Lichauco in his paper on Imperialism said:
"Imperialism has one underlying strategy. That is to prevent its victim from relying on itself, on its own resources. That strategy consists in stifling the emergence of conditions that would induce and enable its victim to pursue an autonomous course of development. Imperialism destroys the capability of its victim to stand on its own, and undermines the victims confidence in itself. "Stripped of its self reliance, divested of its capability to stand on its own, the victim is reduced to a status of complete dependence and, thus reduced, has no choice but to rely on the very force that has victimised it. It is therefore manoeuvred into a situation where it must accept the aid and assistance offered it — along with the exploitative conditions that attack to that aid and assistance — and wind up, as the Phillipines has, with an immeasurable sense of misplaced gratitude. Reliance of one on another, places the former under the control of the latter. And when one is under the control of another, he is ready for exploitation. This is the core of the imperialist relation." Lichauco op cit. Page 24.
Is this the intention or the result of New Zealand's aid programme? Certainly there is no evidence that we are assisting those who are taking the revolutionary course of throwing off their dependence. Those who we assist in Asia are almost invariably allies of the United States and are dependent on the US for their survival.
Aid to South Vietnam
New Zealand's political interests in Indo China are evidenced by committal of troops to help prop up the Thieu regime and its predecessors, our stubborn refusal to recognise the PRG as an administration in South Vietnam equal with the Thieu government and by the selective nature of our aid to the various countries of Indo China.
The government maintains that humanitarian considerations guide their aid programme in the region, however our medical and "civilian" assistance cannot be considered in isolation from the decision to commit New Zealand troops to the war. The change of government saw an apparent change of policy. Has there been however any substantial shift in the objectives of aid to Thieu since
If we take the aid programme for
However let us at present look at the realities of the Thieu government and their health system.
Dr John Champlin, an American physician who spent over three years working in Vietnam, testified to the House Foreign Affairs Committee on
"In the summer of
Hospital Administrators there informed me that several cases of Poliomyelitis had been diagnosed locally, but they had been unable to obtain polio vaccine from the authorities in Qui Nonh, the province capital. On my return to Qui Nonh, the province medical chief told me simply that polio vaccine was not available. Later a Thieu government official in Saigon said that their supply of vaccine, donated by the Canadians, could not be distributed to outlying districts (Bong Son is on Highway 1, the main North South Highway) because the vaccine spoils without refrigeration and refrigeration was not possible in the countryside.
Meanwhile, ice cold beer was being delivered by Helicopter to US combat troops in the field and research laboratories in North Vietnam had long ago discovered a method for producing a trivalent vaccine that does not require refrigeration. Polio became a rare disease in the North 12 years ago. In the South, anachronistic diseases like polio continue to be rationalised as inevitable in a poor country at war." Records of
The health system is as corrupt as the other aspects of the Thieu administration. Private patients in South Vietnam are
There has been a steady decrease in the money spent by the Thieu government on health. It reached a peak in
It is clear that our assistance in the health field in Vietnam is not part of a general programme to improve health services in South Vietnam. "What then is the effect of the aid?
The government of the Thieu regime receives 80% of its total finances from the government of the United Slates. The Thieu regime is totally dependent on the United States. The objective of aid to South Vietnam is the survival of that government, not the survival of a few victims of the war and of Theiu's negligence.
You will note from the
In late
The money that we are spending this year on Bong Son would provide fifty portable medical and surgical kits that are the basic village unit in the health programme of the PRG. Thousands of New Zealanders have contributed to the purchase of some of these units in the certain knowledge that they will be used in a general campaign to improve the health of the people in areas administered by the PRG.
The provision of medical assistance by the New Zealand government to South Vietnam is not necessarily a praise-worthy thing. They have made a decision to support one side. They claim humanitarian motivation but-give assistance to one protagonist in the conflict. This is largely in the field of health, an area of endeavour where the recipient is criminal in his neglect. The other administrations of Vietnam that place a high priority on health care are excluded from New Zealand's official conscience.
Our humanity also extends to the provision of equipment and assistance to the Saigon Police. This year will see the expenditure of $60,000 on police boats.
Claiming that the project was "inherited by the present government", and that the government would probably have not entered into the project of its own volition, the Labour Government is still left in the embarrassing situation of being less progressive on this matter than the US Congress who have forbidden US aid to police or prisons in South Vietnam. Mr Walding said that to renegue on the agreement to provide that assistance would have possibly led to a suspicion of New Zealand's veracity in Asia.
We must already be doubted in many quarters. Labour was elected in a pledge to give humanitarian assistance to the Indo Chinese peoples. No direct assistance has been given to either the DRV or the PRG. Mr Walding has expressed the hope that they will have a bilaterial programme in North Vietnam but that, "North Vietnam has not been able or willing to respond to our and other countries' desire to assist the reconstruction and development of their economy."
This is hardly surprising, Government has not established links with the DRV in Hanoi, we believe that no contact has been made with the DRV Embassy in Canberra and when the government offered $3,000 in assistance to the DRV it insisted that it be administered by a multi-lateral agency.
I leave the subject of Vietnam with this thought. Mr Walding maintains that the Police boats will be used for "routine civilian work". What is meant by that is anybody's guess. However this law was posted by the Thieu government in
Excerpts from the After the Signing of the Peace Agreements,
Narmic/Vietnam Resource Centre.
The Cooks received in
Over the years we have imposed a system of government that is based on New Zealand values. We have destroyed the self sufficiency of the traditional economy and replaced it with one that served the interests of New Zealand, created unemployment and placed the Cooks entirely at our economic mercy.
The present base of the economy lies in agriculture, in fruit and copra. New Zealand is the major market for these goods and controls the industry. A great deal of the economy of the Cook Islands is controlled by two New Zealand families. The Bakers, through Island foods, control the processing of primary produce and the Turners through Fruit Distributors control the export of fruit.
The Cooks have a massive balance of payments problem. In
Although the Islands are fertile and productive 23.6% of imports to the Cooks were foodstuffs. Development on the basis of such dependent economy is nonsense.
42% of our
Of the almost $12 million dollars spent in the Cooks
With the completion of the international airport some diversification of the economy is expected with an influx of tourists. However, who will profit from that? The airport has been built by New Zealand. Air New Zealand will fly the route and make the money from that. They will build the hotels and make the money from those. Only the scraps will be left for the people of the Cooks and a few jobs as happy smiling servants of the tourists. The tourist industry could well deepen the dependence of the people of the Islands on resources other than their own, it will do little to cure the basic ills of their economy.
"If you happen to live on a Henry Island — one that supports the governing Cook Islands Party — there are plenty of hand-outs coming your way. New buildings, sealed streets and the trimmings, while over the way the next island, an opposition stronghold can be in dire need of some solid agriculture advice and investment."
This says Tom Davies is one of the biggest faults of the present administration.
Money has been poured into social amenities such as housing, fine buildings, education and health.
But there has been no advance in economic development which would place these amenities on a firmer base, he says.
"We have fine buildings instead of fruit coming out for export. This doesn't build a country." Tom Davies, Leader of the Cook Islands islanders' Problems, Richard Long, Dominion
The one man committee of inquiry into the activities of Fruit Distributors Ltd should possibly have come up with a more detailed plan for bringing some justice into the pricing of Island produce than just the simple expedient of an increase in the consumer price of the fruit in New Zealand.
If we are serious about assisting the development of the Cooks then the advice and assistance we must give them must be based on their needs. They need to increase the level of efficiency in their agricultural industry, they need to develop work opportunities for their people so that the dis-asterous migration to New Zealand can be halted.
As things presently stand the Cooks are one of New Zealand's private little Bantustans. As they come to New Zealand to take the rough end of the industrial stick they are taking from the Islands their most productive people. Stopping the flow by New Zealand government edict is no answer. Assisting them to live independent of any concerns about New Zealand a shutting off the tap that pays the salaries of the civil servants and the offices that they work in.
If a company such as Fruit Distributors Ltd decided to mechanise the banana industry in the interests of more profitable operations they may well do so at the expense of more jobs.
Only the people of the Islands can help themselves. The best aid we can give is encouragement, technical and capital assistance when they need and never to stand in their way.
The poor of the underdeveloped countries are unimaginably poor. New Zealanders must in time realise that placing money in the Corso collection box is not going to have much to do with the elimination of the degrading poverty that the ordinary people of Africa, Asia and Latin America are subject to. Only the poor through altering the relationship between them and the rich of their own country and between their countries and the rich countries can ever eliminate poverty.
The New Zealand government is beginning to give unprecedented assistance to one country that is attempting to do just that. An increase in our aid to Tanzania is a hopeful sign for those who are committed, to the war on poverty.
However, other New Zealanders have been contributing to people not in power struggling for the same goal. The liberation movements of Indo China and Africa can use our assistance.
It's not often that we reprint from the Catholic Sunday newspaper Zealandia, but the article below which appeared on May 12 cried out for wider publicity. A longer report of the interview with Dr McDonald appeared in the same issue, and we commend it to anybody interested.
A call for people to work actively toward a quick destruction of the present political and financial system, in the interests of this society's mental health, has come from Auckland's Carrington Hospital Superintendent, Doctor Fraser McDonald.
Dr McDonald has said that he cannot see the present economic system being of real use to any worthwhile society.
"I don't think you can get a feeling of community in a capitalist society. It's too fragmented."
Dr McDonald said that by definition it treated people as objects to be manipulated, "which is the total antithesis of any worthwhile culture."
Pipe in hand, Dr McDonald calmly identified the factors which he believes have turned our society into one which is "basically emotionally poverty-stricken."
Alienation from tribal backgrounds, hostile environment, the nuclear family, the economic system.
Speaking of the retreat to the nuclear family, and "the terrible pressures this puts on people," Dr McDonald said that the situation was not being helped by our economic system.
"
The system really demands that we have a big pool of pretty rootless workers, who can shift quickly from city to city."
He said that there had been no economic drive to change the social structure.
"It has suited the capitalist system to have this sort of society grow up, where people haven't got any roots anywhere.
"They're really just interchangeable units of labour, who are appropriately housed like cattle."
Dr McDonald said that housing "we provide in our cities these days, is just high-class cattle housing."
"
And then people wonder why they feel awful."
Realizing the danger of building up an advanced "ambulance ' service with psychiatric hospitals and clinics, while people continue to be chopped-up in the system, he said there has got to be political change, "and it's got to be something along the lines of Christian-communism."
"That's if Christianity is a valid part of our tribal structure."
Of the churches' possible contribution to the drive for a politically and spiritually sane society, Dr McDonald said that all the churches "have been too cautious about polities in the past."
"They have always up-held the status quo."
He cited the example of the clergy and laity in Latin America, "who are actively, even taking machine-guns to destroy a corrupt political system."
He said he thought this was certainly the right direction.
"Whether they should actually be pulling triggers on machine-guns, is a very debatable point"
"But I certainly think their attitude, about how far they would go to change the political system, is the way."
Dr McDonald said he thought "truly worth-while church members should be active political revolutionaries."
"Because we have got a sick economic and political society, even though it has been papered over with efficient ambulance services."
The continuing struggle between the Salient Metaphysicians and the Salient Materialists exploded into all-out war this week. The notorious Papist John Henderson and his henchmen Richard Siegert and Derek Fikkers led the metaphysicians to a resounding victory over the materialist David Tripe and his running dogs. For the first time in many years, the word of God was preached by Margot Bourke, with Les Slater clinging to every word, and the materialists desperately running for cover in Salient's pornography file.
Siding with the materialists were: Claire Smith, Audrey Young, David Waghorn, David Tripe, Wiki Oman, Allison Mackay. Graeme Simpson, Lloyd Weeber, Anthony Ward and Krishna Menon.
Building the Kingdom of God, were John Ryall, Colin Feslier, Brendan Smith, Grub, Mark Derby, David Rutherford, Bishop Finau, Paulo Freire, the almost-converted Les Slater and Christine Haggart. Stephen Hall sat on the fence.
The issue was Steeled by Roger Editor and Keith Stewart took the pictures.
Advertising Managar : Chris MacKay (Home phone 64-698).
Published by Victoria University of Wellington Students Association, Private Bag. Wellington and printed by Wanganui Newspapers Ltd. Drews Avenue, Wanganui.
In
To begin, graduation once took a very long evening, for all faculties presented their graduands on the same night, and the full muster of staff in a long, dignified procession took a considerable time to assemble on the stage. Then followed three hours of ponderous ceremonial, offering a good night's money's worth for the audience and the chance of a pleasant slumber for certain staff members. How can one account for the fact that while the graduation ceremonies now take two evenings and degrees are conferred on a hundred more graduands, yet even allowing for repeats of the speeches and annual report, and this year the conferring of an honorary doctorate, the two ceremonies combined took less time than the one eighteen years ago?
I must admit to disillusionment. By dint of marrying a man with a Surname initial early in the alphabet I had achieved a seat in the front row, and although outdone in youth, beauty, academic achievements and regalia by the doctoral candidate, was looking forward to acquitting myself with grace. Over the years, too, I had carefully bred my own claque to provide applause, lured them to the ceremony with the promise that there was sure to be a streaker, only to find them faced with a command that there should be no individual applause. My cramping of their natural impulses into conventional modes meant that they stayed dutifully silent, but I admired those members of the audience who defied the edict and clapped when they wanted to. In the old days even the most obscure scholar received a meed of applause, and there is certainly time available for it in the evening's programme. I maintain that any ceremony has an inbuilt right to be tedious, and the audience's expectation of an evening of breathless interest is not high.
Way back then (I am almost beginning to think of them as good old days, although the atmosphere was restrictive, the buildings cramped, equipment outmoded and student facilities almost non-existent) the degree itself was rolled into a semblance of a scroll, but expediency has dictated that now it be a flat, hygenic envelope that cannot be torn, spindled, mutilated or handed to someone else by mistake.
Next the female graduand, already togged to the eyeballs in yards of frilly tulle, an academic gown, a hood, an illfitting mortarboard, a scroll and long white gloves, was further encumbered by a large bouquet, presented at the side of the stage by a flower girl, stationed for this purpose in a section of seats at the front of the hall. This distinction was denied the men, for which these days they are profoundly grateful.
The long ceremony wound to its end, and graduands and partners moved off to parties while the hail was hastily cleared, a band installed, the floor powdered and the Students' Executive assembled to greet the returning graduands at the Capping Ball, put on by the Students' Association to fete the successful members of their ranks. The ball was the highlight of a Capping Week full of activity of the ill-organised student sort — a Procession, an Extravaganza, a few feeble hoaxes, Cappicade, drinking contests....Many of these activities have very rightly been discarded: I can watch the abbreviated ceremonial with little regret, but the lack of recognition of the graduand by the Students' Association really hurts me. During my years on the Executive (
As one of the middleaged generation I thought that perhaps the whole idea of ceremonial was repugnant to the graduand of today, but I was soon disabused of that idea: the graduands were as excited, the parents as proud, as ever they were in the past. After all, every graduand had a choice whether to appear in person or not, and no-one was there who didn't want to be.
Seeking some sort of rationale for the lack of Student Association interest in the function I steamrollered into the office of the Editor of Salient, feeling that this might be an issue to rouse him as it would have done my colleagues on the paper 20 years ago, and was offered the following suggestions: the ceremony is a survival of medieval European ritual and as such is anachronistic and unsuitable for a young country on the other side of the world; that it tends to reward an elitist group for being successful in gaining their mealtickets; and that 45 to 50% of the socio-economic strata of the country never make it to University. I find I can accept those suggestions and still feel justified in demanding that the Association provide me with a cup of tea and a biscuit once every 18 years or so.
There were moments of pleasure in the ceremony, too. It was pleasant to be capped with so many of my former pupils. The earnest young, student Vice-President of yesteryear, magnificently arrayed in velvet bonnet, was shaking hands as Dean of his faculty; the handsome young English lecturer had undergone the same metamorphosis into Dean; the wily student politician of an even earlier day was dominating the proceedings as Pro-Chancellor. I would be tempted to exclaim at this point O tempora, 'O mores' or 'Eheu, fugacesl' if the singing of the song of Victoria University, 'O Victoria Sempiterna' had not informed me that a knowledge of Latin is no longer a requisite for staff or student. The words may be difficult today (they were always doggerel) but I would have thought the tune at least would have been familiar. Women's Libbers may care to take up the case for abolition of that condescending last verse about 'omnes virgines' (my case in
I suggest that the Students' Association re-examine its attitude, so that when I next appear on the platform I receive a handshake from the President of my fellow-students as well as from the Dean and Pro-Chancellor, and am not made to feel a pariah because I have dared to pass an exam.
Many students have expressed concern over the crowded state of the Library, especially of Study Hall and the Periodicals Room. However, the situation now appears to be slightly better than it was at the start of the year. Where the students have disappeared to as exams approach is anyone's guess.
The crowding is a far cry from the situation of a few when the Library was little used until the third term and only then overcrowded.
The Librarian, Mr Sage, & says that use of the facilities is definitely increasing, with a big jump
Seats have also been lost in the Periodicals Room, where there was a pressing need for more administration space Paradoxically, the extension to the fifth floor has not added a great amount of seating, being offset in construction on floors 1, 2 and 3 (Where the Staff Club also expanded during the holidays)
Prospects for solutions are not particularly bright. Relict for periodical readers will hopefully come early next year, when new classrooms in Cotton Stage One will allow the library to expand into the claustrophobic RB 100 classrooms. This will require considerable rebuilding, but will give far more room for periodicals.
The Study Hall situation is far less optimistic — there is no comparative expansion area. In the long term, a Study Hall-Reference section is planned for the third floor but this is obviously dependent on the removal of the Staff Club, now envisaged if and when Von Zedlitz is completed, the Library is looking now at alternative ways of developing Study. Hall and its services When extra areas do become available, but constraints of tune and above all space make these plans, a little unrealistic.
One thing students can certainly be thankful for in this whole sorry situation is that the roll fell by the amount it did at the beginning of this year. Extra students would have further confounded the position to the point possibly where something had to be done?
Rents above market price are being charged at the University's Everton flat scheme. According to a recent decision students are being charged $10.50 a week for a single room and next year after construction on the flats is completed and furniture properly allocated, the rent could be as high as $12.50 per week.
With the closure last year of the successful student commune at Bowen Street, the University's Accommodation Service is attempting to do something practical for students by organising flats for them rather than hostels.
The Everton flats consist of several buildings with at least two or three fully self-contained flats in each building. They are about 10 minutes walk from the university and are run by the Presbyterian Church Trust Board.
But though the system is an improvement on hostel accommodation it has several drawbacks. Besides the high rents, students are expected to pay four weeks in advance together with a bond of $35 each. This appears to be a direct violation of the Rent Appeals Act. Of course the basic rent does not include gas and electricity bills Linen and blankets are not provided and must be hired from the Trust.
The high rent could be excused as necessary to cover all the luxuries in the flats such as carpets, cutlery, automatic washing and drying machines etc. But are these necessary? The Accommodation Officer. Mrs Brown, says the flats could be used tor sonic other purposes in the summer time, perhaps for tourists. If this happens, the business motives of the Trust Board in building the flats are suspect.
The regulations for Everton Hall are also questionable. Resident in each flat must must be of the same sex, this excludes married students.
With high rents and rules against mixed flats, Everton Hall is obviously not for students who want to live in reasonably cheap places and in whatever manner they may choose. The only type of people who can afford to live there are either tourists or students with high "moral" backgrounds who can assure their parents of a tightly-disciplined, church controlled system.
Decisions about the administration of Everton Hall have been made without consultation with students.
Ka mutu nei a maua korero ko Dr Pryde mo te Reo Maori, ka whakaaro aka au ha pal tonu pea ki te hart i te era ma te mana o to tatau reo ma ta tuhituhi i nga korero i roto i tenai reo kia mohiotia ai kei te ora tonu to tatau rao. Na reira mahemea koutou ki te kite tho i roto i aku koraro kei ta ha nga kaupepa, kei ta kotiti ranei taku no Maori ma tuhi mai ki a au, ta tari o ta Aomerama, Wharewananga O Wikitoria ma nga whekamareme. A, mehemea ha korero a koutou kei to tatau reo, me tuku mai ano hoki ki konei. Engari koi wareware koutou ki re whakapakeha i eue korero.
Ko n lure tuturu akt? kua whakahoutia maianei ko te whakakorenga mai o te tekiona iti nama rua. O te tekiona tekau ma ono (a) i nga kupu "kia rua nga wa, neke atu ranei kaua e rahi atu i te wha tau te huihuinga." Kei te whakaae matau ki tenei whakakorenga enpari me whakanoho ki laua wahi enei kupu "ki ta te nita i whakatau ai" Na konei ka huihuitia kaioa taua tekiona tekau ma ono rua, kua penei te panui "ko nga tangata katoa kua eke noa tau ki re ono tekau ma waiu, e pa ana ano ki nga tian kua whakawatea, na te ekenga o nga tau ki tenei, ka tika ano kia whiriwhina hei tiati i raro i tenei tekiona mo te wa tekau ma rua marama, ki la te Minna rsnai i whakaiau ai".
"Ki ta te Minita ranei whakatau ai". Akuanei pea kaore he tiati i te watea i te paunga o te 12 marama, a kei te manaakma i anai te tiati e te iwi. Na enei lake e rua ka tika ano te had ki te mau tonu i tona tunga mo teiahi atu tekau ma rua marama, otira "kita te minita i pai ai." Kei te lino tautoko hoki matau ki nga korero a te Minna kei teiahi atu warn, me whakakao mai ko te iwi". Kia maumahara kei tetahi atu waht kua ki matau ma te Minna tonu e whakatu nga tiati.
Kooti Piira Tekiona toru tekau ma waru "Tokorua" ki re "toru" E ki ana te Ture Tuturu ake "kia rua, kta rahi atu ranel nga tiati mo te Koou Pnra ka mana ki te tu" "Ko ta te pukapuka ma i mea ai kua whakatokomahatia ki te toru. Na konei ka mea matau me whakakore atu nga kupu "kia rahi atu"; a, me whakanoho atu nga kupu kia penei ai te panui i te Ture Kotaht mana e iwa rau e whitu tekau ma toru 'ka whai mana nga nati tokotoru mo te whakatu i a ratau hei Koon piira'
Ma re mimta e whakatu nga tiati mo te wa poto. Me toru nga tiau mo le Koou piira.
A tenei wiki e e tu mai nei ka korero au mo te Reo Maori.
Now that Dr Pryde and I have not any more to say about the Maori language, I have felt that it would be of some advantage perhaps to continue the influence and prestige of the language by writing articles in our Maori language to indicate that it is very much a living language. Therefore, if you observe that some of the subjects I treat and my knowledge of our language do not meet with your approval, send me your objections, with explanations, care of Salient, Victoria University. It you have any articles in Maori to send me please do so Don't forget to send in your translations in English as well.
The Principal Act is hereby amended by omitting from subsection (2) of Section 16A the words "as two or more periods not exceeding the four years in aggregate." Our Committee agrees to this omission but to substitute in place these words "or as the Minister so rules". Thus the whole section 16 (2) so reads "Any person who has attained the age of 68 years, including a judge who has retired after attaining that age, may be appointed as a judge under this section for a period not exceeding 12 months or 'as the Minister so rules'."
"Or as the Minister so rules." There may not be another judge available after the expiration of 12 months or that the judge is commended by the people. In both these instances we feel that he could continue another 12 months, subject to the discretion of the Minister. We are emphatically in support of the Minister's statement elsewhere of the involvement of the Maori people. N.B. Elsewhere in this paper we have stated that the Minister should appoint the judges.
The Principal Act says "any two or more judges shall have power to act as Appellate Court". According to the White Paper, "two" is changed to "three". Therefore we maintain that the words "or more" should be eliminated so that the
Next week I will be discussing the Maori language.
In
Many films have been made about William Bonney, from the inane 'Dracula Meets Billy The Kid' to the quietly impressive 'Dirty Little Billy'. This one begins where another. 'Left Handed Gun' (Arthur Penn directing Paul Newman as the Kid) left off.
In the latter Billy goes down with three cohorts in a small hut, but in this version the anti-hero makes his escape and goes on to perforate many more enemies before eventually succumbing to the implacable Garret. One might call this artistic licence, or one might call it Peckinpah's pandering to his own preference for manhunt material. Either way, the tampering with fact realises bugger-all in the way of benefits.
The problem is not one of unwieldly material, however. It is simply a matter of treatment. The script wanders away from the main action with annoying frequency and, on its return to matters germaine, proceeds at a pace that can be called pedestrian at best. The employment of no less than five film editors compounds the confusion. And then, the distributors having shortened the film for release in New Zealand. Our local censor adds (or rather, subtracts) his own lacerations and, to recall John Donne... 'all coherence gone'. Like Billy himself, the film has enemies within and without its own camp, and they cannot overcome.
Another problem that besets the production is the dilatory effect of the performances. James Coburn has neither power nor presence and conviviality is not enough to create a Pat Garret that matches the myth. And then we have Messrs Kristofferson and Dylan. Kristofferson is a singer of some note, but his acting languishes into monotony: and even if he had a good time playing cowpoke, the pleasure doesn't travel. Being neither sufficiently good looking to attract attention, nor sufficiently ugly to command it, the onus is upon him to burn up the screen as well as houses and horsethieves. But he doesn't. Neither does Bob, although his part asks for relatively little. In fact, the elusive Bobby the Kid seems to have written his own lines (after the film was shot, judging by his voice-lip synchronisation) and they seem tailor-made to keep the Dylan enigma as impenetrable as ever. However his score is excellent, and it is reassuring to know that he is still a musician. Not so re-assuring, however is the thought of his continuing to frequent movie locations. The same can be said of Rita Coolidge who makes nothing of what is a dangerously vacuous part anyway. And she looks, like her minstrel mates, out of place among the Peckinpah pros. Amateurism is a nice idea, hut it is enjoyed most when movie going is also an amateur affair and a buck is not solicited at the box office.
In fact, it's the pros who have the best of the film, and under Peckinpah, this is hardly surprising. One of the film's very memorable scenes centres around an extraordinary demise played to the hill by Slim Pickins and Jack Elam's glass eye gets a good look at a fine supporting, performance. L.Q. Smith does rather well too. But these occasional spurts never threaten to save the dismal proceedings into which they are laced.
Something which is of a high standard throughout, and thank God it is, is John Coquillon's photography. His style is very similar to that of Peckinpah's usual photographer: (Lucien Ballard), and at least, he manages to create a few atmospherics that are both distinguished and memorable. Were the other elements of the film as positive as this, then it would have been.....well, better. As it is, we shall have to wait for the full expression of Sam Peckinpah's genius, and hope that it is not a long, long lime coming.
When this goes to press, 'Alvin Purple' will be screening at the Plaza. Another Aussie film, and here's hoping that it will be funny.
Queen of the Night is a showcase for Maggie Bell's voice, ranging from the rock of Caddo Queen to the vcrging-on-honky-tonk Oh My My (by Ringo and Vinny Poncia) to the slow elegant blues of Trade Winds. But the number one cut is the title track. Around Maggie's vocals the organ rolls and swirls, the Sweet Inspirations woo-woo in the background and Steve Gadds drums keep everything firmly anchored to the floor.
On side one there's yet another version of JJ Cales After Midnight. Maggie's version is only second best though; she hasn't got the sleazy raised-eye brow grope of Cales voice and arrangement.
Interspersed among these highlight tracks is a variety of rock and blues songs, all of which chug along nicely.
During her days with STC. Maggie got compared with the late Janis Joplin. However on this album her voice is warmer, rounder, more flexible than Joplin's ever was.
Queen of the Night is a very good album because it avoids pretension, because Maggie says, here I am, here are my songs. I hope you like the album. I like the album.
Now why, you might ask, have I reviewed Maggie Bell and Donovan together. Stylistically there's no similarity, but both are known artists, struggling to find their form again.
The comparison I want to make though is that whereas Maggie Bell has made a solid album with a minimum of fuss and with musicians who aren't even vaguely familiar to me, the same cannot be said of Donovan. His album. Essence to Essence, features Carole King, Carl Radte, Peter Frampton. Steve Marriot. Alan Spencer. Bobby Whitlock. Jim Gordon, and without the occassional times they let rip the album would be a total waste of vinyl.
Donovan's musical direction and his social outlook is fairly reflected in the choice of front cover. All white innit, with Donovan sitting on his heels, hands on knees, impassively staring out at us. And on the back he's still there; this time he's bowing. Very spiritual. He seems to be like a stuck record: back in
I can't really say I like any of the tracks. Except parts of "The Divine Daze of Deathless Delight', 'Yellow Star', and "Saint Valentines Angels'. On these three cuts the band boils over and Don's vocals seem less offensive. Or perhaps with the good musical sound we forget his I boring warble.
Ok, in bygone days, Donovan Leitch wrote some pretty nice stuff. Hurdy Gurdy Man. Colours. Candy Man, with gentle melodies and original lyrics. But nothing on this album, especially vocally, is any where near as good as that. And it is a shame.
Loudon Wainwright is much more to the point, irrelevent mother that he is. I could call him an iconoclast, but he wouldn't think of himself like that, and I don't want to use big words for no reason. Nor does Wainwright. He writes as he feels, moulding his words around the music. From 'The Man Who Couldn't Cry' on side two: And he cried and be cried and he cried/On the forty-first day/ He passed away/He just dehydrated and died.
There's nothing self conscious about this LP. And there's not a helluva lot of quality either. But if you want some good time music (The Swimming Song) an unaccompanied song about Li/a Minclli, a Woody Guthrie song recorded live, with some very funny new lyrics (I Am The Way, based on New York Town) then side one of Attempted Mustache might be for you. And that's only side one.
Did I mention iconoclast? No, Wainwrights a Quixote: tilting harmlessly at windmills.
But with his songs in his heart and a smile on his lips:
It would appear that Peter Rotherham for the Young Socialists was making a subtle criticism of Salient in his letter last week. Evidently he feels that Salient needs a puzzle page and, being a generous sort of fellow, has supplied one.
For the Young Socialists, Mr Rotherham charges that Don Franks, Peter Franks and myself have treated our readers to a "disgusting display of fabrication". Readers are left to solve for themselves what these "fabrications" may be. Before they rush in to win one year's supply of The Militant for the "correct" solution, readers should recall that Rotherham called me a liar earlier and fell flat on his face. (See Salient,
Mr Rotherham claims that we are defenders of the Khrushchovite clique that seized power in the Soviet Union. If he read my original article, he would have realised that I denounced the Brezhnev regime. To put things as simply as I can so that even Rotherham may be able to understand, to me the Soviet Union is a country where a new type of state monopoly capitalism has arisen. Usurping Soviet state power in the 50's, the Khrushchovite clique turned the dictatorship of the proletariat into a dictatorship of the big bourgeoisie and preceded to restore capitalist relations of production in the Soviet Union. State monopoly capitalism is the economic root of present Soviet policies of external expansionism. When he claims that we defend Brezhnev, Rotherham is lying in a rather pathetic manner. After all, readers of Salient merely have to look through the correspondence to see this for themselves.
In a tight corner, Rotherham is reduced to a Voltairian argument: "We defend Solzhenitsyn's civil rights and not his politics." What kind of "Marxists" divide a man from his politics? The struggle between Solzhenitsyn and Brezhnev is one between two different kinds of reactionaries. Anyone who had read Solzhenitsyn's writings would have realised from the start that he was a reactionary — that is, if they had any kind of political understanding. Until Solzhenitsyn became so great an embarrassment, Trotskyites the world over defended him as a "revolutionary".
The neo-nazis in West Germany are not as naive as the Young Socialists for the Socialist Action League. Albert von Thadden, leader of the NDP, said that the merit of "The Gulag Archipelago" was that it was aimed at the "left forces of the whole earth". The SAL believes that it can be a positive force in the democratisation of the Soviet Union. Unlike the SAL, being a person with political consciousness, von Thadden makes a class analysis of Solzhenitsyn.
Rotherham now tries to show that he grasps class struggle in socialist society, despite his previous performances. In his somewhat breathless style, Rotherham stales: "The working class and its allies must constantly struggle against these forces (bourgeois ideology) in defence of their state and their ultimate goal of socialism". (Salient,
Two points can be made here. Firstly, of what value is there in declaring that you have an abstract understanding of class struggle in socialist society if you are incapable of grasping its concrete manifestations? If you cannot recognise the concrete manifestations of class struggle — in the economic, political, ideological, military, and cultural fields — what kind of "Marxist" are you? Secondly, contrary to Rotherham's statement, the ultimate goal of the working class struggle is the transitional society between capitalism and communism which occupies a long historical period. During this period of lime, the dictatorship of the proletariat is necessary to suppress the old exploiting classes and to organise socialist construction.
Rotherham once again trots out the peculiar claim that all dissent and critical thought are suppressed in China in the name of the class struggle. That is a delusion in which he is determined to persist. That it is completely contrary to all the evidence is irrelevant to him. In China there is continuous debate on all issues from running the factories, the neighbourhood, the brigade, the commune, etc to fundamental questions of Marxist theory. In the course of this debate, proletarian ideology asserts itself. But it is a debate that arises again and again as the socialist revolution deepens in China.
The way Rotherham expresses himself, typical of petty-bourgeois radicals, shows how little he understands the problem. You can't suppress ideas and critical thought. As long as classes, class contradictions and class struggle exist in society, non-proletarian ideology will inevitably find expression. Non-proletarian "dissent and critical thought" will emerge in China in the future, and it exists at present.
What can be suppressed are the handful of capitalist roaders and die-hard reactionaries who refuse to accept the socialist regime. But people who genuinely make mistakes are not liquidated as Rotherham would like us all to believe. If all people who have expressed bourgeois thinking were repressed, how is it that Teng Hsiao-ping, the No 2 capitalist roader in China during the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, has once again taken a leadership position in China? Because of Mao Tsetung's policies towards people who make mistakes, he was given the chance to remould his thinking and to return to proletarian revolutionary line. Other former leaders in China showed themselves to be die-hards and have been retired from active political life.
P.S. I wonder why Peter Rotherham failed to answer the important questions raised in my letter in the last Salient of the first term.
It is obvious that you have no idea whatsoever of narrowness in scope if you consider an article on the use of magic in 'Lord of the Rings' as narrow — or is it possible you are condemning the article about a book which you have not even read? There is much written about Tolkien and his works, but little if anything written specifically on this topic, which happens to be, in my opinion, a very important and interesting issue in 'Lord of the Rings'. Having read that such an article exists, I am, despite your assumption that it is not likely to 'interest and stimulate enough readers', already sufficiently interested to want at least to see it. Also, judging by Marty's literary excursions previously published in Salient, I would not have thought it likely that his style would degenerate into 'stuffy and academic and uninteresting' and am inclined to believe that perhaps it is your personal bias against Tolkien that matters more than anything else in assessing the worth of the article.
In the last Salient Gordon Campbell listed the song 'Bring It On Home To Me' as written by Willie Dixon. In fact it was written by Sam Cooke.
Salient gives me the shits. It's just gotta get better. Where are all de comix? I gel bloody pissed-off reading endless crappy letters in microscopic type so my eyes crawl over my face. Where are the funny articles? Let's leave serious shit to the money-grubbing estab, presses.
Your editorial on Gay Liberation in Salient No. 8 leaves something (rather a lot, actually) to be desired. First, one or two errors of fact. The Young Socialists have not "influenced" Gay liberation, except to the extent that they're the only socialist group to show any real support for gays. Gay Liberation does not believe or try to "give the illusion" that "the gay life is the good life"; but we're adamant that it is at least one form of "good life". Your comments about our name are dubious. I'd agree mat we're not a Front in any real sense, but in no way have we devalued either the word gay or the concept of liberation. The word "gay" has been used in this sense for 100 years, which I think establishes it as a legitimate meaning. And liberation means freedom from oppression. Gays are oppressed, and to start to compare different forms of oppression, as you are doing (is racism really more oppressive than sexism?) is a meaningless exercise in semantic masturbation.
More serious are your comments that Gay Liberation is lacking in "class content", does nothing to rectify the inequalities of decision making in society, and is the liberation of a group of people whose sexuality is a "disorientation" caused by "social relations under capitalism". Gay Liberation is a struggle against sexism, which is the belief or practice that the sex or sexual orientation of human being gives to some the right to certain privileges, powers, or roles, while denying to others their full potential. Within the context of our society, sexism is primarily manifested through male supremacy and heterosexual chauvinism. Since in the long run sexism benefits certain persons or groups, in the long run it cannot serve all the people, and prevents the forming of a complete social consciousness among straight men — in other words it's a means of maintaining elitist power structures, and hence of maintaining class society. The anti-sexist movements - Gay Liberation and Women's Liberation — have a very definite class content. Particularly as they're well aware that the people most oppressed by sexism are working-class gays and women. The fact that these movements are at present largely middle-class does not invalidate their potential for being true people's movements.
Finally, your comments on homosexuality as something that will disappear in "a planned, socialist economy" are nothing short of fatuous. Do you really believe that a mode of behaviour found in most animals and in all human societies will disappear simply through economic revolution? Your whole argument is based on the middle-class perversion of Freud which states that homosexuality is a sexual malfunctioning caused by adverse family and/or social conditions. If you can't manage to get your information up to date and read some current psychological literature on homosexuality (which views it as a back-firing of the unnecessary repression to which everyone is subject), then you're stuck with your bourgeois prejudices.
That's Ok by us, sweetie, but don't try to pass them off as Marxist analysis.
After reading various articles in Salient on the topic of justice and the law etc such as 'From the Courts' by Wiki Oman, I have often wondered why they remain unchallenged and unexplained by the "authorities". Surely those who run the prisons or the Ministry of Justice or somebody must have something to say about the allegations levelled at them by your, columnists and other writers for Salient.
If you have received such challenges or explanations why the heck haven't you printed them.? On the other hand if you haven't received such correspondence does this mean. I suspect that the authorities have no explanation or statements to make in their defence?
There has been some publicity given by the news media to the actual shocking state of our prisons hut I' ve yet to see or hear the newsmedia make any comment on the apparent injustices and lack of understanding that, according to Wiki, occur practically everyday in our courts. I get the impression that the authorities are trying and generally succeeding to keep the public in the dark about the stupidity of some of our laws, the unbalanced values placed on certain laws, by that I mean that the "punishment doesn't fit the crime" and the ignorance shown by certain magistrates of the customs and values that are held by various ethnic groups specially Maoris and Islanders.
Whatdoyah reckon?
P.S. By the way is all Wiki's information first hand?
[We have not been challenged on what we have printed about the courts and justice, but we continue to invite such a challenge. I agree with you that it is unlikely that anybody actually could explain away the present injustice system.
Our information is indeed first hand — Salient sits on the press bench at the magistrates court.—Ed]
I am still waiting for a reply to my question in the last issue of Salient. Perhaps you or John McDonald would care to reply at some stage. In the meantime it has been drawn to my attention that there are a number of more recent activities by the Students' Association's president which students may well be interested in.
I was deeply disturbed to note a blatant misrepresentation of the truth in the court reports of last week's issue of Salient. In the third case reported (an offensive weapon charge) Wiki Oman stated that the magistrate refused to give the defendant his weapon back. Being in court at the time, I was myself pleased to see that Mr Hobbs SM did in fact return the knife to the defendant at his request.
While I appreciate the wonderful job Wiki does in pointing out the inadequacies of our criminal justice system, I feel that it is bloody pointless telling silly little lies for the sake of sensational journalism: this amounts to an insult to the readers of Salient.
For fucks sake Wiki get your facts straight.
[We have looked into this matter and our reader is indeed correct — the knife was eventually returned. Our reporter says that she thought the magistrate replied to the request for the return of the knife by saying "I see no reason why you should" whereas in fact, he said "I see no reason why you shouldn't". It was neither our reporter's nor our intention to "tell silly little lies for the sake of sensational journalism ". The return of the knife was only a minor part of the story and a simple mistake was made. We are pleased to correct the mistake and apologise unreservedly to Mr Hobbs SM for having made it. — Ed.]
So Peter Rotherham has finally replied to the letters criticising him which were published over five weeks ago in Salient. It is worth noting that in his letter on the question of Solzhenitsyn and the nature of democracy in the socialist countries, Mr Rothcrham called for debate on the subject.
Terry Auld, Don Franks and I have obliged Mr Rotherham by joining the debate. But what have we got in return? Refusal to answer our arguments in a serious fashion, and petty abuse! I can assure Mr Rotherham and his very Young Socialists that his evasive delaying tactics will not wear me out, I am happy to accompany him in this debate as far as he wants to go, but I would like to warn him that the further he goes, the more he is exposing himself as an inept anti-communist.
To rum to Mr Rotherham's latest letter. He accuses me (along with Terry Auld and Don Franks) of a "disgusting display of fabrication, along with the usual apologies for the repressive policies of Stalin, Brezhnev and Mao." Mr Rotherham gives himself away with this silly smear. He knows full well that none of us support the Brezhnev clique of counter-revolutionaries, and that we have made this clear on a number of occasions including this correspondence. So why do you have to resort to lying about our political positions, Mr Rotherham?
Last Friday night I discovered Mr Rotherham hiding in the shadows in the Cuba Mall trying to sell "Socialist Action". He told me, in between his unsuccessful exhortations to the passers-by, that that I (and presumably Terry Auld and Don Franks) were "fellow travellers", just like people in the
What does all this "fellow traveller" talk mean? Why does Mr Rotherham use it as a substitute for serious argument? The epithet "fellow traveller" is used by Rotherham because he thinks it will make me and others cringe and blush and run away. A lot of the better known supporters of the Soviet Union in the Seato. As used by these people the term "fellow traveller" means a person who is so stupid that he has been sucked in by the horrid communists and acts as their dupes. Mr Rotherham of course uses the term in exactly the same sense as people like Hoover did — and with exactly the same objective in mind — to smear people.
However Mr Rothcrham's smear is misplaced. Neither Terry' Auld, Don Franks or I are "fellow travellers" because we believe in the doctrines of Marxism-Leninism.
I note that Mr Rotherham has now recognised that there is class struggle in socialist societies. But while he admits this point in the abstract he cannot understand it in a concrete fashion because manifestations of the class struggle in China and other socialist countries and revisionist countries are represented by the Trotskyites as mere squabbles within the bureaucracy. The part that the Chinese working class and peasants have played in the great struggles against counter-revolutionary agents like Liu Shao-Chi and Lin Piao is ignored by Mr Rotherham and other Trotskyites, and is effectively written out of history by them.
When I was in the People's Republic of China last year with the NZUSA delegation, a group of us visited a worker and his wife in a new housing settlement in Shanghai. I asked him what the Cultural Revolution had meant for him. As I outlined his answer in an interview in Salient (
During our visit we saw several other indications of the importance placed on political study of Marxist-Leninist works in China as a part of the deepening class struggle especially in the ideological sphere. Looking back now it seems fairly clear that what we were observing was the Chinese people's preparation for the Tenth Party Congress in late August last year where Chou En-lai exposed Lin Piao's counter-revolutionary role. Since the Tenth Pary Congress the class struggle has further deepened with the movement to criticise Lin Piao and Confucious.
Wilt Mr Rotherham tell me how he would characterise the criticisms of aspect of the Chinese education system by Huang Shuai, a 12-year-old girl who criticised her teacher's authoritarianism and Chung Chih-min, a student who exposed the fact that he had got into Nanking University because his father, a leading political cadre, had "pulled strings"? Both these cases have been widely publicised in the Chinese press. Are they manifestations of the continuing class struggle, Mr Rotherham, or are they examples of Chairman Mao's "repressive" policies?
Finally I would like to point out to Salient readers that' Mr Rotherham and his fellow Young Socialists have done a rather clumsy somersault over Solzhenitsyn. "We defend Solzhenitsyn's civil rights, not his politics," brays Mr Rotherham who knows only too well that this position is a recent development. Perhaps Mr Rotherham would be interested in the following quote from the International Socialist Review, a Trotskyite paper put out by his co-thinkers in the USA. It comes from an article by one Dora Taylor in the "In other words, the axis of Solzhenitsyn's creative writings is the illumination of the betrayal of those socialist goals by the Stalinist bureaucracy and the results of that betrayal in terms of human destruction. His social essence is with the revolutionary tradition and that tradition is nothing less than the liberation of humanity."
Now Mr Rotherham, just think back to Solzhenitsyn's Nobel Prize lecture and his remarks when he nominated Andrei Sakharov for the Nobel Peace Prize. Remember his attacks on the national liberation movements, his lies about the "Hue mass killings", his smears on Ramsey Clarke and his defence of the South African fascists? Please tell me what is the "social essence" of that sort of thinking?
No, no, no. Roger Steele is not alleged to be the editor. He is Salient. He is it.
Yes, yes, yes. Politics is pretty emotional stuff too. As I was coming out of Salient after having personally handed in my letter two weeks back, I heard the tearing of the envelope. Twelve second later a thundering voice echoed through time and space — "bullshit!". If that was the gut reaction of Roger, then Roger is bullshit (see his reply to Poetry Fan in last week's issue).
He is bullshit. He is it. Gee! I am confused. No wonder he wished he knew himself. Perhaps he does now.
Once again David Tripe has shown his sympathy with those who want something for nothing. I refer to his article on Japanese capital. The situation which he describes as desirable is one where Japan gives SE Asia a certain amount of money with which to do what they like. He fails to recognise that the Japanese have a right to a return on their investment and as such want to see where it is being invested.
In
If there were no international investment then each country would have to generate its own like Britain and Germany originally did. This will either bring the social horrors of the industrial revolution to SE Asia or at worst some Stalinist genocide. The countries of SE Asia naturally want to avoid this ghastly situation. Yet they still naturally want to obtain the riches they see as they look around the capitalist world. Yet they do not want to have the disadvantages that go with it. You cannot say mat some part of the capitalist system is acceptable to a people's experience, hope to obtain it while keeping out some undesirable part of capitalism. They not only want the cake to eat but it seems they want bits of other people's cake.
I am disappointed to see that you have chosen to open the columns of Salient to a common liar. Readers of Salient may have noticed Rotherham's latest retort in the debate that has taken place on the subject of Solzhenitsyn and class struggle under socialism. The reader will have noticed that Rotherham has finally abandoned all pretence of political argument, and has been driven to the last refuge of all apologists for fascism and reaction — brazen and hysterical deceit.
I do not make such claims lightly. To state the facts plainly, so that no mistake may be made I refer to Rotherham's comment in the May 2 issue of Salient that T. Auld, P. Franks and myself "treat (students) to the usual apologies for the repressive policies of Stalin, Brezhnev and Mao". This allegation is a lie.
At no time, in Salient or any where else have any of the "accused" apologised for or in any way defended the treacherous social imperialist politics of Leonid Brezhnev. In fact the opposite is true. On many occasions T. Auld, P. Franks and myself have made clear our bitter opposition to the Brezhnev clique of social imperialists and have always attempted to expose these traitors as enemies of the world's people.
This is not to say that we in any way condemn the correct proletarian repression of the bourgeoisie by J.V. Stalin and Mao Tsetung. But these facts are well known to Mr Rotherham. I have personally told Mr Rotherham my views on these issues to his face. I have written letters not only to Salient but also to Socialist Action expressing these views and Rotherham has read these letters. It would seem that the Trotskyist school of falsification dies hard.
The debate over Solzhenitsyn has not only exposed Rotherham as a merchant of deceit, it has shown yet again that Troskyists such as Rotherham are agents of the bourgeoisie in the progressive movement — conscious of their role or otherwise. Rotherham fastidiously squeals that "one of the most disgusting spectacles in this debate has been the attempt by Auld and company at using quotes of Marx and Lenin as a cover for 'justifications' of the bureaucratic regimes in the Soviet Union and China." What does this mean?
There are many other points that Rotherham makes in his tearful little letter, all of them distinguished in one way or another by dishonesty, anti-communism and a quaint stupidity. Space dictates that these points wait for another time. On the general subject of Solzhenitsyn however I recall giving materials explaining the Marxist Leninist view of the question to a proSolzhcnitsyn, anti-communist workmate of mine, a refugee from eastern Europe. She returned after having read the documents and declined to argue the matter further.
"Donald," she said, "I still like Solzhenitsyn, I just don't like the socialist system!!" Perhaps this is the objective basis for Rotherham's position on the matter also.
You damn well know who I am, so don't you dare reject this letter or else I will beat you up!
You must be aware by now that some Malaysian students are just bloody troublemakers around the varsity. For example, during the last MSSA do they wrecked the Union building. The President of the club has already admitted responsibility and apologised for the disorderly behaviour of these troublemakers. At another party recently the same group of fellows caused another upheaval which brought four car loads of cops.
Now that I have got the undivided attention of these gentlemen, may I hasten to tell them to cool down over what I have just misrepresented above. Read on mates.
It is a real pity you guys are misdirecting your energy to the wrong sort of upheavals. What you ought to do is to direct your excess energy to threshing over the problem of how to kick the colonial buggers out of your country. If you enjoy fighting so much you have plenty of opportunities at home. Fighting for your friends here, helping them out is a good sign. It indicates you are capable of further sacrifices, such as making sacrifices for the people at home. You know what is going on at home. Ask yourselves: 1) Do you agree with the present political setup at home? 2) What can you do to bring about changes such as: more political freedom;
3) Political freedom....what is it? 4) Should you allow things to go on mere until whatever freedom you have now is taken away? 5) Try to think about the ways you can go about changing things....low wages, hiving standards, hunger, detention without, trial, racial discrimination???
Call me what you will but keep thinking.......
That food they cook up in the Cafe sure must be mighty powerful stuff, for I find the lower floors of the Student Union Building have a permanent stench of stale stew about them. Perhaps the all-powerful Student Executive should indulge a little time and money into a dendorisation programme. I have not yet had the pleasure of tasting the lunchtime cuisine around here, but if it's as bad as the stench it leaves, I reckon I'll just stick to Mommy's garlic and onion sandwiches, as usual for lunch.
For once salient last week actually provided tome entertainment and stimulation for me. Three things of note were include: Photos and comments; poems; and a couple of interesting letters, of the first, please make it a habit. Of the second please also make it a habit, but with the amendment that the poems are there for the poetry and not the situation or intention of the author — intentions may be valid but that doesn't necessarily mean the poems are any good. Or the third, please continue writing comments after the letters as the flashes of inanity permeating these comments provide a lot of amusement. Keep it up.
With reference to Phillida Bunkle's letter in the last Salient, one can only entirely agree that women are oppressed, that pregmant women are more oppressed, that society in general has scant regard for human life.
But how far does one bend before this oppression. Like the Gay Libber or Feminist, should not one rise and fight back rather than capitulate? In the face of disregard for human life one should surely defend the life rather than cooperate in its death. Since, in Ms Bunkle's words, abortion is not 'a positive good' but 'a pragmatic solution to immediate problems', why do some prominent feminists advocate this 'necessary evil' in a society so full of evils?
Surprisingly many regard the ova and sperm as being of the same status as the foetus. A little clarification will resolve this matter. Both the ovum and sperm are alive but of and in themselves have reached the fullest development of their potential. When united, however, they produce a new being. This being is totally different from either the sperm or ovum. The new being contains its own complete genetic "package" programmed for active continuing development into a human person. The new being is unique, quite different from its mother, if not yet separated from her.
So there are no 'arbitary' or 'pragmatic judgements' about the differences between one kind of life and another. From the scientific analysis of each form of life the foetus is clearly of a higher status than ovum or sperm. The foetus is a human being — ovum and sperm only have a possibility of forming human life. Given the status of the life eliminated abortion is not a humane option to, but a furtherance of, the barbaric conditions of society.
We do not have to ensure that each sperm and ovum eventuate in a person. What all should insist on is that the natural functioning of the reproductive processes take place and two of the natural physical processes are bocturnal emission and menstruation.
Where emphasis has been laid on putting human sexuality in a natural setting has been done so because here natural is synonomous with human. Because the human person is a psychosomatic unity what is natural to our physical processes is best for our whole personality. I think it was Levi-Strauss who said that sex is is dynamite for the human person. If it is not treated in its proper manner it can wreak havoc. When we defend the natural we are, in fact, defending what is most human.
Phillida also mentiones that 'traditional' morality is out-of-date and 'proves' it with facts and figures about present behaviour. But here morality has been reduced from the behaviour best suited to the human personality to the behaviour pattern of most people. Morality should be governed by what humans are, not by what they do almost instinctively. The 'head count' morality of sociologists and sexual surveyors such as Kinsey is therefore useless. There was more human happiness with traditional morality than there is with the form of morality most people hold today. Higher suicide, neurosis, family break-down rates indicate the failure of up-to-date morality.
The punitive aspect of pregnancy thus expressed "she shouldn't have an abortion because if she didn't want to get pregnant she shouldn't have had intercourse," I agree is stupid and heartless. But such a comment does not prove that abortion is right.
Incidentally the Society of the Protection of the Unborn Child was not founded by Dr Dunn, but by Sir William Liley, world renowned for his knowledge of foetal life. He is a Methodist.
Frankly I'm frightened at the use of 'being wanted' as a measure of whether a human life is allowed to develop. Logically its converse awaits us — that the unwanted can be eliminated.
Whereas Ms Bunkle says she will support abortion as long as society is so hypocritical and so harsh with women, especially pregnant women. I find myself tempted to say, as Baxter did that abortion receives my support as long as priests and nuns fail to lake unmarried mothers into their presbyteries and convents, bishops fail to exert political influence for better conditions for mother and child, and Catholic matrons curse and disown their daughters for becoming pregnant. I don't give in to the temptation however. Human life does not tolerate the conditional respect.
But the idea basic to my thought is that human life has ultimate value because it is human. The foetus may not have attained personhood, but it is human. Therefore it has rights of the same order as any man or woman. Happiness is the thing.
L.C. Goh's continued display of crooked thinking in your paper of his views on the economic and political situation in Sarawak made me wonder why he is so keen about siding with the Malay fascist-racist and colonial government. It did not take this writer very long to find out exactly why.
1) Mr Goh according to people from his home-town is the owner and managing director of a company in Kuching. The extent of his wealth is unknown but the following points are relevant:
Having to shit in the river is an unfortunate situation not to mention that a lot of the people have to wipe their arses with leaves. Perhaps Goh may laugh about this but at least he knows that this fact exists. Should a man in his more fortunate position sneer at the misfortuntes of others? This is unbecoming of an intelligent person as he no doubt is.
Where he can measure his wealth by the number of cars he may own, this is not so for over nine-tenths of the population in this colonial territory of the Malays. (Sarawak's population is about one million). And the majority of owners of cars are the Chinese who wittingly or unwittingly have exploited the country and people to achieve their present state of prosperity: This is not to say every Chinese is filthy rich. In the main they are better off than the Malays and the Dyaks. Certainly they worked hard for their money and in the eyes of many Chinese you can see dollar signs. What is wrong with Goh's unflinching defence of the present political system is because he is defending his own interests which are contrary to the interests of the people of Sarawak. Would Goh sacrifice his wealth for the betterment of the poor, ignoring Marxist philosophy for the moment? Answer this for yourself.
2) It is uncertain why Goh does not acknowledge the existence of 'Lim Pang Siew', 'Wong Kee Hui' and 'Yaacob' after all these are the very people who have the same interest as he... money. He probably is displaying his lack of knowledge of Mandarin used in the translation of the first two names. They are usually spelt 'Ling Beng Siew' and 'Ong Kee Hui' respectively in English. The latter is a dupe of the Malay Government. 'Yaacob' or 'Yaakub' is the Chief Minister of Sarawak, while Ong is one of his deputies, a man who sold his principles and the interests of the people for his present position.
Goh's letter puts him in a bad light. He is defending his own interests under attack, but at the same time is dubious about who he supports. He began his initial letter by supporting the 'Malaysian government' and then loses himself with terms like the 'country' of Sarawak which does not in fact exist..
3) He equates the incident where the corpse, of the assasinated police inspector was made mince meal with that of the wholesale slaughter of Chinese in Indonesia and people in Chile. (He forgets to mention the massacre of his own kind in Malaya) This is hardly a decent comparison. The enormity of the crime committed in the two countries cannot be compared with the killing of a person who did not act in the interest of the revolution. Killing is only justified in a state of war which is what is happening in Sarawak. Goh would then appear to condone mass killing of people where they act against his interest as those in Indonesia and Chile; but not otherwise. Perhaps he agrees that the massacre of the Chinese on
4) As a final year student he should be humble enough not to sneer at a first year student who surprised this writer with his clear drinking. Write more letters First Year BCA Student! Sarawak needs more people like you to expose muddled principles of final year students.
5) People who harp the loudest on behalf of oppressive government sometimes do the least for them. This statement is exemplified by the way a lively supporter similar to Goh is acting: Lim Michael Hee Kiang.
This loud mouthed blabber was extremely pro-government while he was studying at Victoria One would believe him as a sincere raver if he continued raving and working for the Malaysian Government when he got his degree. What do you think he did? He is now advocating for a private legal firm where the financial figures are longer. It is not clear how he jacked up getting out of his Colombo Plan bond. It must have cost a lot of money and persuasion to deny the revolutionaries the pleasure of welcoming him to Sibu (must ask Jack about this!).
What is clear therefore, such 'peace laving folks' will trade in their 'principles' to work for their own interests where it concerns working for the good of the country, when it comes to the crunch.
6) In case Goh or Jack and company worries about this writer's identity you clowns ask yourselves would you be so wise as to reveal yourself in view of the repressive 'laws of Malaysia' which makes a mockery of the so-called 'rule of law' politicians so fondly bandy without knowing what it really means? At this stage all who oppose the Malaysian government have no right to do so whatsoever openly. Therefore only fools would subscribe to Goh and Go's naive thinking that criticisms should be made openly under one's own name. Those who want to criticise continue to do so and using a pen-name mere prudence not the 'cowardice' Goh and his ilk condemn you of.
P.S. Are you there Jack? If ever I want to let you know who I am, old boy, I shall come before you to denounce your government in no un-certain terms and save you the trouble of having to go on a witch-hunt. But who is as stupid as that? Wait till I am at the other end of the gun!
Some time ago I bought an advertisement in for World Vision with the request that it be published in Salient. I was shown an article from Salient
I wrote to Geoff Renner, the director, who replied to explain why the article was utter rubbish. Even without such information it is possible for the reader to see how the article is divided into three parts: the story, which says little and draws stunning conclusions; the headline, which is a direct and deliberate lie; and the cartoon, which is another direct and deliberate lie.
After arguments with said editor at some length, I was told to run along and see Peter Wilson, who apparently knew all about the terrible things they were getting up to in the Philippines. My eyes would then be opened. "Oh yes," said Peter, "they suddenly called for a lot of workers there. I think it's pretty suspicious — they must be bolstering right wing regimes." Funny how our editor can turn poor Peter into an expert on the situation on the basis of such knowledge as this.
So I still couldn't get anything printed. Roger offered to write Mr Renner a letter explaining why, or at least get a friend who knew something about it to do so. This seemed fair enough for the time being. That was quite a while ago now. I've just got a letter from Mr Renner commenting on the lack of action, and in fact (probably through laziness rather than deliberate intent) nothing has been done. Consequently I have got fed up waiting. Mr Renner comments:
"It seems strange that a paper which on the surface seems open to every kind of whim or thought or project finds it difficult to even mention something which is making a contribution to relieve the suffering of thousands of people in Asia."
There was no suggestion whatsoever in the original article that the money does not reach sponsored children. The ludicrous claim was made that most of the money in their appeal went to advertising and the rest to Thieu's generals but Mr Renner has plenty to say about this sort of lie. However, no comment was made on the sponsorship system. I have proof that either the money does reach them, or else World Vision is a massive fraud on worldwide scale. Although the title of the article claimed this the story didn't, and there's as much evidence for saying that World Vision is a fraud as there is for saying that the Chinese Revolution is a fraud. In other words. World Vision is a very worthwhile organisation. It works somewhat differently from other charities in that each person may become the sponsor of an individual child on a basis of about 32c a day; so that you will be looking after one child and you will know exactly where your money is going and what it is doing.
It's unfortunate that the political chicanery of the Salient editocracy has delayed this for so long, but I became tired of waiting. I held back from writing anything while I thought that some answer would be made very soon, but it seems as if it will (conveniently) be the end of the year before anything happens. Since he hasn't obliged by writing to Mr Renner yet, he'll doubtless oblige by printing objections under here. His little italics will explain in down-to-earth prose my lack of political knowledge (conceded) and exactly why it is important for children to suffer lack of education, starvation, lack of clothes or even die rather than do anything which may prolong the rule of Daddy Thieu.
I am of the opinion that a majority of people here believe that it is more important to help people than to change the names of their slave masters. Of course, they don't need so much help when they're dead. But if anyone is interested, they're welcome to contact me for details about World Vision — find out for yourself.
[Next week, no doubt. Herr Philip will catch on to the trick of sneaking a tearjerking sales pitch into the letters' column because it's been rejected in the articles department. It's all very well to care about children suffering, that's why we have campaigns for medical aid to Vietnam. But aid the World Vision way, while fine in short term humanitarian terms, is used by the Thieu regime to keep themselves in power. In down-to-earth terms. Thieu and his lackeys tell the suffering peasants "sec we give you this help, if we get voted out (joke) or shot out of power, you will lose this.' Many peasants are in no position to disbelieve this. It's a lot more complex than that of course, but briefly the point is that if you let a crooked government administer aid it will use it to entrench itself in whatever it can. And the number of casualties will increase and the repression will go on. Incidentally, what has World Vision done about the hundreds of thousands of political prisoners in Thieu's jails?-Ed]
I read about the case of Khoo Ee Liam from Canta No. 8. He was arrested by the Malaysian Security Police on
But the thing that alarms most of the Malaysian students is that Khoo was a student at Canterbury University and he took an active part in student politics and was an executive member in in
Khoo's arrest shows that the Malaysian students are not politically free here. The intimidation by Jack de Silva of Malaysian students particularly those involved in the Eastern Cultural Concert last year, is regarded as a threat to the freedom of Malaysian students. Khoo's arrest further illustrates that there is no actual political freedom whatsoever in New Zealand, not to mention the freedom we get in Malaysia.
Although we Malaysian students are in a democratic country — New Zealand, we are still under constant threat from the Malaysian Government. The campus is supposed to be a place whereby different ideas and political beliefs can be exchanged. But with Khoo's arrest, who the hell would come foward in public and put forward a different view to that of the government. This case shows that the Malaysian Government is really a fascist regime.
MSA and MSSA claim to represent Malaysian students and look after their interests. Will they come out and speak against the government in the case of Khoo's arrest? Ken Lim claimed that MSA is an independent body (I suppose he meant politically independent) in his letter to Salient No. 9. MSA is an independent body all right, but it should do something practical now. It is a chance for MSA to show how independent it is, Ken Lim. It is easy to claim to be an independent body and do nothing to stop the government from interfering with students' freedom.
I hope that our fellow Kiwi students should understand by now that the Malaysian students are under the political oppression of the Malayan Government through it High Commissioner in New Zealand.