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.
Zionism has always been a difficult concept for many people to grasp. Noone has forgotten the holocaust of the Second World War when 6 million Jews were killed by a facist regime bent on complete extermination, and history is full of examples of discrimination against the Jewish people.
A television programme last week brought this opression vividly to light again. Using Nazi documentary footage and other records which the Third Reich meticulously assembled, it graphically portrayed the systematic way in which Hitler attempted to rid first Poland, then Russia and the whole of Europe of Judaism.
But this programme had some serious faults. German Fascism was not just anti-sematism. Behind the latter theory lay the concept of the master race. The Nazis believed that the Aryan race was superior to all others. From this it followed that they had superior rights to all others: superior rights to own property and land, to breed, to exist.
They were the chosen people, God was on their side, and given all this it was the just and natural corollary that they should appropriate the land and the means of living of those that surrounded them. There is nothing in fascism which is necessarily anti-Jew, or anti-black. For people who recognise the wrongs of nazism it is important to understand the conditions which give rise to those wrongs and the theories which support them. Fascism must be recognised wherever it exists. To go no further than identifying it with a particular manifestation (eg. Nazi anti-sematism) is to allow it to appear unchecked in another form. So where does Zionism fit in? Compare the attributes of nazism described above with the way the Zionist state of Israel was established and has expanded. 400,000 Palestinians were driven from their homeland in
No people has the right to place itself above another. That they have had to suffer the same does not excuse their actions, but merely indicates that they accept the principle. Salient does not accept that principle. It has consistently opposed the oppression of peoples, and especially where that oppression assumes the form of open fascism, racism or sexism.
Some people criticise the paper for lack of objectivity. What does this mean? In our terms objectivity is gained by an analysis of a given situation taking account of all the factors which materially affect it.
Impartiality, which is what the daily press is sometimes credited with, is supposed to be the presentation of information without analysis. It is an admirable idea but manifestly unrelated to the real world. Everybody has a value system, and that value system will always affect the way one views the world and describes it. One of the fundamental differences between Salient and the daily press is that they deny this while we do not.
It follows from this that we can only be open in our analysis, explaining why we oppose something or why we support it. Getting back to Zionism, Salient has been criticised for presenting "only one side of the story". While this is not true (Ambassador Yaachov Morris himself wrote a long article for us late last year) we do freely acknowledge that we have taken a a consistent stand against Zionism.
Is this democratic? some may ask. If it is our democratic duty to encourage fascism, then the answer is yes. If it is not our democratic function to take a critical stance towards things then the answer could also be yes. But Salient has a different understanding of the term.
During the May holidays two important events took place which will directly affect students, that is, the International Students' Congress and May Council. It is interesting to compare the two, for though they have slightly different functions, they dealt with essentially the same problems - student involvement.
The International Students' Congress was attended mostly by Malaysian students and participants from Polynesia, Africa and New Zealand. The congresses are always highly enjoyable with an atmosphere of closeness and unity that is not often experienced in other student gatherings.
The strength and unity of the Congress was a product of an intense programme of social, sporting and cultural gatherings and political discussion. It is with an increased understanding, not only of ourselves and one another, but also of the society outside that unity really can be won.
But the Congress, like Council, had to work out a strategy for involving other overseas students who did not attend the Congress in this year's campaigns.
This year's May Council has been dubbed "the Council of compromise"; most constituents realised that unity was crucial if NZUSA was to combat the three withdrawl motions. Thus the important changes to the structure and voting procedures were voted on unanimously. Though the Council presented the strongest and most united front for some time, it still did not effectively tackle the problem of student involvement.
Delegates to the Education Commission threw out the idea of yet another bursaries march in the second or third term, but did not replace this form of student involvement wi with any other. It seems to me that not only NZUSA but all the local constituent Associations and student bodies, such as NOSAC, are going to have to look very closely at new ways of involving their students.
This often means confronting political issues rather than avoiding them for fear of alienating students. It also means a more novel form of student involvement, for example, spontaneous marches and pickets. Finally, it will mean taking up issues that are of direct relevance to students.
Gotcha snofreeze yet!
The Capping SRC took place on
The first motion to be considered by this SRC was from Michael Carr-Gregg and Peter Niculescu. Carr-Gregg himself, eloquent and debonair as ever declared the necessity for the appointment of a Men's rights officer. This was no frivolour motion, he said, for men were opressed in many ways. Men are forced, among other things, to paint roofs, make the first move in sexual encounters, and hide their true sentiments, living in life-long trepidation of being branded a homosexual.
Gerard Winter stood up, supposedly to oppose the motion, but used the opportunity mainly to tell several rather lewd jokes, in extremely doubtful taste. The gist of his argument was that men had always had rights and know them perfectly well and therefore do not need an officer to uphold their rights.
What followed was a flagrant denial of the basic and fundamental democratic righ rights of students. The motion was put to the vote, and it was clear to all that the vast majority of those present supported it. The Chairperson, however emulating the democratic principles of Indira Ghandi, ruled the motion lost. Responding to the frenzied indignation of the crowd, she protested that as a mere Arts student, she had a distinct difficulty in counting. This controversial motion was held over for next week's SGM, a cunning tactic, for it will become constitutional if passed.
At this point, the meeting, hitherto so promising began to degenerate into an anarchic and muddled bore. Richard Bowman suggested that men only should have a vote at this meeting, and this was carried. There followed a rather embarrasing charade, in which a monkey of some description attempted in vain to persuade us that members of his species should have the right to self etermination. Amongst cries of "Be a dagg, drop off, the ape mysteriously disappeared. It was later revealed that the monkey was Andrew Tees thinly disguised.
John Hebenton, still rabidly denying the rumours circulating about his extra-marital relationship with a Masai Goatherd, (Pull the other one, John!) stood with Gerard Winter in a motion that our esteemed President, Lindy Cassidy should lie upon the table "with Heaven and Earth"! Lindy being female, and unable to speak, nominated Winter himself to speak against his own motion, on her behalf. In an eloquent speech, he advocated a lesser penalty, namely that she should merely kneel upon the said table. This was rejected, and she was indeed forced to lie upon the table, though "Heaven and Earth" were conspicuously absent.
Hebenton in a rather frail attempt to cover up his own inadequacies proposed that the members of the "press gang", (Tees, Winter, Hebenton) should become the governing Body of the Students Association, and should receive a $3,000 a month honourarium, in recognition of their their service. Some of the lunatic fringe stood up to support the motion. An unknown individual of questionable sanity, proposed a slightly perverse amendment to this motion, namely that the money only be awarded if the Press Gang performed their duties in the nude. The Amendment seemed to be disregarded and the original motion was not passed, showing the hostility that the spartan remnants of the original milling throng felt towards the "Gang of Three".
After this thrilling episode, our hearts still pounding rapidly, Andy Tees made another feeble attempt to voice his opinion, and was shouted down. There was a suggestion from the cheap seats that Lindy Cassidy be allowed to speak, this was passed and she expressed the opinion, generally held, that the meeting was a bore. There followed a few minor motions, among which was one that at future Capping SRC's, DB should be sold so that the spine-shattering dullness of the whole thing be slightly mellowed. By this time the meeting was in its death throes, and we put it out of its misery by dispersing, after being led by Lindy Cassidy in a brief, but moving rendition of "Solidarity Forever".
Contributed by an animal of little brain.
Yes! It'i All Star Pro Journalism. An exciting night of fighting.
But before crossing to centre ring for the action, a word with Steven Benbrook, Commonwealth Libel Champion. "Well, hello New Zealand. It looks like a great n night's entertainment we've got for you tonight. First on the card we've got 6-than tag action, and then you can see the ladies in action. And then it's over to centre ring for the first bout."
Sally Redman leads her demon team, feared the University over, into the ring. Simple Simon Wilson, otherwise known as the human orangatan, is first in, followed by brother Nigel and Jonathan Scott. Jonathan picks up a rotten tomato thrown from the audience and eats it. Not to be outdone Nigel pulls up one of the ringside posts and begins to gnaw it reflectively as Simon starts to knock things over, things like the referee and David "Tartan Trousers" Murray, first of the opponents to venture into the ring.
Eager to avenge this insult to his chief-Peter Beach began to accuse Simon of editorial bias. The opposition immediately calls foul, and while the ref's attention is distracted Nigel starts to eat Doug Thompson, airline ticket and all. Victoria Kennedy, remembering her responsibilities as referee orders both sides back to their corners.
Taking advantage of this respite, Lamorna Rogers tries to nurse her team back to fighting health, but Doug is pretty far gone: only his legs now protrude from Nigel's grinning countenance.
But David's Scotch blood is really up now, and without waiting for the beginning of the bout, begins to re-arrange the master-sheets, while Peter starts destroying copy. Even Doug does his bit. His feet are just at the right level for him to reach the type-setter and begin to type ou out corrections.
But Simon's not beaten yet. He's got th the staff wages, and begins to make judicious alterations, while Nigel starts on a sketch portraying David as the first man with two bums, one at each end of his body.
Lorraine Robinson now enters the ring illegally and starts to burn Peter at the stake, screaming "Heretic", and covering him with Religious Studies essays soaked in kerosene and stout.
Just as things begin to get really heated Margot McGillivray leaps into the ring and after only an hour or two manages to interrupt the Fighters to show them a letter from La Heyman's lawyer. "You're about to get deposed by the Zionists," she screams.
The squabble stops as quickly as it began the erstwhile foes joining forces against a common enemy and prepare for the coming battle. Tra la la.
Until the revolution occurs Simon Wilson will continue to edit Salient, and VUW SA to publish it. We all hope that Wanganui will continue to print it.
Last Tuesday, Zaitan Atashi, an Arab member of the Knesset (Israeli Parliament) spoke at a forum in the Union Hall. The session was a valuable lesson in democracy, Zionism and the value placed on open debate by the various parties who took part.
Atashi began by stressing that his views were not necessarily those of his government (he belongs to the Democratic Movement for Change Party which helps form Menachem Begin's coalition majority). His aim, he stated, was to "clarify certain views held by certain people." The picture he painted of Israel and the justifications he gave for Israel's actions undoubtedly did that. One theme ran through everything he said: his vision of democracy and unity in Israel. The following points were made to support this argument: Arabic and Hebrew are both first languages, and although there are only seven Arab members of the Knesset there could be more, there could be less. There is no state religion and religious freedom prevails throughout the country. There are no religious parties.
Atashi admitted that many people still feel unequal and unhappy, but pointed out that this was so in any "democratic" society. Israel, however, is "the only country in the area to give this privilege of being a free Israeli, to speak out, voice an opinion and criticise the Israeli government." It is "an example to other societies and communities in the world and especially in the Middle East." The aim of the government is to "Israelize all Israelis', and in doing this it "has now reached a very satisfactory situation."
Atashi did add that there is one exception to the rule of equality: Arabs who do not do their military training cannot gain employment in any profession or government department connected with the defence forces. He did not say how far this restriction carried.
After talking about the situation inside Israel Atashi began to explain its foreign policy. "As long as our independence is not accepted I do not forsee peace in the Middle East," he said, adding a little later the claim, "we do not deny independence to our neighbouring states."
This naturally led to the topic of Lebanon. "Israel went into Lebanon. I shouldn't deny any facts," asserted Atashi. He reminded the audience that the PLO is now fighting the UN troops, saying that this made him glad (presumably because the world could now see what sort of people the PLO are).
Although he made several references to PLO activities in the region Atashi did not seem to base his justification for the invasion on the retaliation line first adopted by Israel and its supporters. He argued that the conflict in Lebanon which flared up a few years ago was not between rightist and leftist groups, but was a religious conflict.
Turning to other Arab states, he said that since Jordan and Syria had expelled the PLO Lebanon was the only country in the region which tolerated their presence. The two points somehow coincided and indicated that Israel actually owed it to Lebanon to free it from PLO influences.
Although during his speech there were v very few interjections from the floor, on this point he was asked if that meant South Africa was justified in invading Angola to eliminate SWAPO. Atashi's answer was that he wan't an expert on southern Africa and didn't see how the two issues were related.
The emphasis on his views not being necessarily representative came into its own when he allowed that Israel would have to "withdraw substantially from territories occupied since
Atashi finished his speech by telling everyone that Israel was the only country in the world which had managed to withstand four wars; wars directed at liquidating the state.
Then came the questions. Andrew Tees asked what we in New Zealand could do to help bring about peace in the Middle East and was told, "we are in no need of advice on how to create a democratic, secular Palestinian state." Binational states claimes Atashi, always end in civil war.
Back to the question of Southern Lebanon he said "There is full justification for any sovereign state to invade another if threatened." This was again related to Angola, and this time Atashi defiantly admitted, "I accept the strategy".
If the law treated everyone as equal, someone asked, why was it that any Jew in the world could gain automatic citizenship in Israel but that the Palestinians were not allowed to return to their homeland? This was a law Atashi said he didn't agree with.
The land laws, however, were something he did agree with. Repeated questions were asked about what percentage of the land was owned by the Jewish National Fund, an organisation set up many years before the state of Israel was established with the express aim of buying up Palesinian land and keeping it in Jewish hands. Atashi became very angry but would not answer except to say, "This is my state land." Could Arabs lease the land? he was asked. Again there was no answer except a suggestion that critics should go to Israel and see for themselves how well every-think worked.
This was to be the pattern. Atashi would refuse to answer a question, audience members would demand one and Atashi would shout that Israel had the right to act in its own interests and we should go there ourselves.
The meeting really heated up when Don Carson (ex-NZUSA IVP and currently Massey's International Affairs Officer) went to the microphone. He had been speaking for about 20 seconds when the Chairperson La Heyman, encouraged by Atashi and some members of the audience, decided that he wasn't going to be allowed to speak anymore. While Heyman did his best to shout Carson down and take the microphone from him, the latter tried to continue.
Amid a barrage of insults and complaints from the floor, and with Heyman reaching round him to grab the micro-phone, Carson asked how Israel could be considered as a democracy when it had political prisoners and exiled opponents, when Atashi could tour the world defending the state but four mayors from the West Bank were not allowed to testify before the UN on Israeli actions on the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
Atashi replied "I speak on behalf of Israel and not on behalf of the West Bank ...Israel should not accept any biased policy from abroad, including the UN" His even temper during the speech had by now completely given way to a barely supressed rage.
Carson sat down and others tried to speak, but the Zionists in the audience were in full flight and didn't seem very interested in debate. Some people did manage to get their points in. "How can you sleep when the vast majority of Palestinians lable you as a traitor and a liar?" shouted one person.
Shortly afterwards Heyman announced that Atashi had to leave as he hadn't had his lunch. The time was 1.10 pm; Atashi had been ther for just over half the proper time, given a long speech which was listened to in relative quietness, avoided answering questions and then left! He did not come to debate, he claimed as he left the rostrum. It was the first "forum" at Vic. I have seen where the participants did not attempt to join in and where the guest speaker would not accept that his views were open to question and where he did not recognise an obligation to try to defend them.
But the debate was not over. Carson again went up to the microphone and invited those present to continue. The abuse continued alright, but further points were made.
Someone brought up the matter of the holocaust. Carson replied that the holocaust had been used as an excuse for establishing Israel in Palestine, although it was three years after the war and there was obviously no need to guard against the anti-semetic side of nazism. Did Hitler's actions give Jewish people the right to dispossess the Palestinians of their land?
Mike Treen followed elaborating on the land laws which prohibit Arabs from leasing Jewish National Fund land. This was answered by an Israeli who stated that the JNF bought land because the Jewish people claimed rights in the area. "You can show things in an ugly way," she said, "and you can show the same things in a nice way." This speaker later suggested that the Immigration laws were fair because Israel could not be expected to admit the "enemy".
What about the treatment of Jews in Arab states? someone asked. Carson answered this, calling the issue a bogey. "It is based on the racist idea that discrimination elsewhere means Israeli discrimination should exist," he argued.
The question of Israeli expansionism was again raised. Somebody noted that it is not surprising Israel has fought well, considering it receives 48% of all US foreign aid. PLO attacks were cited, and Dave Macpherson (ex-NZUSA Research Officer) asked why anti-personell cluster bombs were used on the refugee camps if elimination of the PLO was the aim. One thousand people were killed in the invasion, and yet only one real PLO target was attacked. Was not Israel trying to do exactly what Hitler had done 35 years ago?
Heyman suggested that in a war it is difficult to know who kills whom, so a good proportion of those now dead had actually been killed by the PLO, not the Israelis.
No one, of course, had the last say. Carson outlined his view of Israel, as a state set up not just as somewhere for the Jewish peole to live, but for them to do so so at the expense of the people already living in the area. The PLO aim was for a democratic secular state where all could live together. Israel would never accept this.
No one had an argument to refute any of this, or if they did they were more content to engage in the easier practice of trying to disrupt the meeting. The grand claims of democracy made by Atashi at the beginning contrasted sharply with the conduct of his followers.
They contrast too with the Israeli record in the Middle East. Atashi can talk till he's blue in the face about Israeli respect for the sovereign territory of other states and poeples, but until Israel gives up its stolen land he cannot expect to achieve much credibility.
The violence of the apartheid system is once again being brought to our attention. The United Nations has designated
In New Zealand, the principal focus for action in this year will be the Anniversary date of the June 16th Soweto uprisings.
On this day, 10,000 black pupils took to the streets of Soweto in protest against the compulsory use of Afrikaans in schools. It was to become a turning point in African resistance to apartheid.
During the preceeding weeks, schools had ground to a halt as several thousand schoolchildren went on strike. The South African Students' movement organised a mass demonstration of some 30,000 students on June 16th. They were stopped by the police throwing tear gas, although the march was peaceful and without incident. A policeman fired into the crowd and Hector Petersen (aged 13) died from a bullet in his chest.
The exact death toll on that day is unknown but in the ensuing week 176 were killed and over 1200 wounded. The anger of the black parents turned on the instruments of their opression - police, Bantu Affairs buildings, rent offices etc.
What had originally been an issue of education, became a nationwide struggle of solidarity to throw off the chains of apartheid. White students who took to the streets in protest received the same savage reply from the authorities. By August 4th, the solidarity of the students and workers resulted in a "Stay at Home" and another mass rally of 80,000 people. Again the rally was broken up by police bullets.
By September the movement had spread and the largest political strike in South Africa's history occurred. Over one million black and coloured workers participated. The Government's reaction to such evidence of solidarity has been severe. Trade Unionists, student leaders and particularly journalists have been imprisoned or banned. Changes to South African law have made it easier to enforce white supremacy. People can now be held without charge, without trial, indefinitely.
Soweto was a watershed the world could not ignore - black children dying for opposing apartheid, dying for their freedom; their parents' and the black communities' unified response; and the clear unequivocal determination of Vorster's government to maintain white supremacy, no matter how many were killed and brutally murdered.
On
The anti-apartheid movement in New Zealand is asking you to show your support for four major aims and to participate in the June 16th activities.
It is not enough that we saw and were outraged by these atrocities at the time. The world must show its solidarity with the black people of South Africa. They, the black peoples, must know when they risk their lives in the struggle, that the world is with them.
June 16th, Soweto Day, has been declared a day throughout the world when we show this solidarity. The four aims are:
"In Wellington the Wellington June 16th Committee is organising action for and leading up to the day of the mobilisation. Activities planned so far include a Picket on South Africa Day (May 31st) outside the South African Consulate in Molesworth St; open meetings on May 24th and June 7th at Trades Hall in Vivian St, starting at 7.30 pm; and a march on June 16th assembling 6.30 pm outside the Town Hall in Mercer St. We are also planning to screen the UN film "The White Laager" on May 24th and 25th. For further information contact Harold Merriman, mobe organiser, PO Box 9695 Courtenay Place, or phone 859-246."
The interclub competition is now well under way. University has entered 12 teams, spread over 5 grades from A reserve to G grade.
There are still a few places available for players who have not yet joined the club, so if you'd like to play competition table tennis, either on a weekly or less regular basis, please phone Brian Read at work (720—030, ext 381) or at home in the evenings (849—334).
Don't forget — club night is every Thursday at 8 o'clock in the gym.
Meeting to organise a forum on abortion as part of the build-up activities to the mobilisation for safe, legal abortion on July 14.
Women and men Welcome Thursday 25 May 12 noon, Lounge.
Join the Labour Club. Membership table. Union foyer, Thursday 25 May 12—2 pm.
Meeting to discuss coming activities leading up to the July 14 mobilisation.
Tues. 23 May, 10 am.. Board Room. All welcome.
Meeting to organise a forum on diplomatic ties with Apartheid.
All Welcome
Tuesday 23 May 10. am. Boardroom Union Building
Organised by the Students Anti-Apartheid Movement
Tuesday 23 May, 5—7 pm.. Union Hall
All welcome.
Israel:
Free
Wednesday 24th May
Union Hall 7:30 pm.
All students welcome.
"If we want a good return to everyone concerned we need co-operation and this means a benefit for the working people engaged in production as well as the benefit to employers."
This assurance that workers will "benefit" by co-operating with the capitalists who exploit them could have been made by the Chamber of Commerce or by any of the leaders of the Parliamentary parties. On this occasion it was trotted out in the Presidential Address of Sir Thomas Skinner at the recent FoL conference.
In fact Skinner's advice is disproved by the day to day experience of working people. As an old unionist put it, "When Labour jumps into bed with capital it's always labour that gets screwed!"
At no time in Skinner's address did he show any lead in the struggle which workers are waging daily to make the rich pay for the economic crisis. Quite the contrary, "...we avoid emnity and violent disagreement between employers and workers", said Sir Thomas. "Instead we have industrial relations, we have discussion and understanding between them and agreements that take care of each of the parties..."
On the question of the present economic crisis Skinner's solution was essentially no different to that of the present government — find more markets for our limited range of products. Never any suggestion that the New Zealand people must make a decisive break with the imperialist powers that keep this country's development lopsided and dependent.
The so called "leaders of the left", the Socialist Unity Party unionists were distinguished by an equal bankruptcy and reliance on capitalist policies to solve the problems of working people. Aside from their attempts to commit the New Zealand worker's movement to the imperialist foreign policies of the Soviet Union the SUP was almost solely concerned with the extention of their influence in the heirarchy of the Federation of Labour.
The "Tribune" crowed in it's lead article, "A number of progressive changes-took place which will allow for a more direct involvement in FoL affairs by the National Council." As the National Council of the FoL is weighed with SUP leaders, it is hardly surprising that the "Tribune" titled it's article "FoL Conference — a basis for advance."
This is not at all to be confused with an advance in worker's struggle. On the floor of the conference the SUP put it's efforts into advocating an "advance" of trailing behind the Labour Party as a solution for workers.
G.H. Anderson (SUP president and Northern Driver's Union Secretary) called on delegates to support a remit from his union which put the question of defeating the Muldoon Government and the election of a Labour government as a "vital task" for the trade union movement. The remit included the following "...a future Labour Government will require a strong, well based and active labour movement to back up Labour's legislative programme in face of the combined anti-labour forces of the National Party and big business (both New Zealand and overseas controlled)."
It only needs a little reflection on the "legislative programmes" of past Labour governments to see that a "strong, well based and active labour movement" is absolute anathema to the Labour Party. Labour introduced deregistration of trade unions and used that particular "legislative programme" many more times than National. Labour initiated dawn raids on overstaying workers. Labour's senior spokesmen have claimed that they have had a gutsfull of the unions" and that "National has joined with the communists to destroy New Zealand."
The Labour Party is just as commited to upholding the capitalist system as the National Party, whatever illusions may be held about it.
Back to Andersen's remit which called for stopwork rallies to mobilise workers behind the NZLP. "This is the single most important remit before the conference", brayed Andersen.
The only difference between the right and the so called left on the issue was whether or not stopwork meetings should be held to rally support for the NZLP. As Skinner quite correctly pointed out the Labour Party doesn't like stopwork meetings.
It is highly significant that the stop-work meetings in support of the election of Labour already called by the Auckland Trades Council were, in the main, a series of failures. It was only when the pro-Labour party propaganda was dropped from the advertizing and replaced by calls to discuss concrete problems, such as unemployment and the fall of living standards that workers began to show some interest in such meetings.
Unhappily for the right wing union leaders the workers are becoming justifiably disenchanted with capitalism's Labour Party.
In his work "Victory of Cadets and tasks of the workers' party" Lenin relates an anecdote that describes very well the misleaders who seek to prop up illusions about the nature of the bourgeois state and reliance on capitalist parties.
"Recently I delivered a lecture on political topics at the house of a very enlightened and extremely amiable Cadet. We had a discussion. Our host said: Imagine there is a wild beast before us, a lion; and we two are slaves who have been thrown to this lion. Would it be appropriate if we started an argument? Is it not our duty to unite to fight this common enemy, to 'isolate reaction', as that most wise and tar sighted of Social Democrats, G. V. Plekhanov, so excellently puts it?"
"The analogy is a good one and I accept it, I replied. But what if one of the slaves advises securing weapons and attacking the lion, while the other, in the very midst of the struggle notices a tab reading 'constitution' suspended from the lion's neck and starts shouting 'I am opposed to violence, both from the right and from the left, I am a member of a Parliamentary party and stand for constitutional methods.' Under those circumstances would not the lion's cub who blurted out the lion's real intentions be doing more to educate the masses and to develop their political and class consciousness, than the slave being mauled by the lion who was preaching faith in tabs?"
Although the main trend in the conference was to collaborate with the bosses by "Preaching faith in tabs" there was also struggle against this trend.
An attempt was made towards the end of the conference to raise the question of the general wage order, which had been held up due to the fact that the FoL president saw an overseas trip of several weeks as being of greater importance than other duties.
Skinner dismissed the perfectly legitimate grievance on the lateness of the wage order as "dreaming" It is of interest that none of the SUP "militants" took part in the protest over this question.
Many progressive remits were passed, but it is doubtful that much action will be taken on them. Nevertheless some remits showed positive thinking, especially on the question of opposing foreign imperialism.
Examples of such remits are' that the NZ Federation of Labour call on Government to re-establish the principle of a South Pacific Nuclear free zone; that the NZ FoL advocate and represent the view that the only solution to the present economic crisis in New Zealand is the en-couragement of economic self-reliance through the establishment of an independently based heavy and machine tools industry, using our resources for the benefit of New Zealanders and being independent of all foreign powers, and reject in any form the Government and employers' solution to the economic crisis of cutting real wages.
During discussion of a remit opposing the despoliation of New Zealand fishing grounds by big powers it was noted that only a consistent policy of self reliance (such as no National or Labour government has ever been prepared to undertake) will begin to solve New Zealand's economic problems. On the same remit it was also pointed out that the Soviet fishermen did not come here to get a sun tan and that it was ridiculous to co-operate with such countries.
Another move to actually grapple with real problems facing working people was the donation by some unions of sums of money to the Kawerau workers.
Many have acclaimed the election of Sonja Davies to the FoL National executive. In the area of the particular problems of women workers it is true that there were fewer snide comments and jokes at the expense of women at the conference than in quite recent years, but one only has to consider the simple fact of the denial of unemployment pay to married women to realise that real struggle in this area has a very long way to go.
The debate on the question of Ethiopia has been interpreted in many circles as a setback for the "Left". In fact it was a setback for the apologists of the imperialist policies of the Soviets, which is another thing entirely. The history of the debate is of some interest.
At the
When this ploy to stop the motion looked shaky the pro-Soviet faction argued that Neary's information came from the capitalist press and could not possibly have any validity. A number of well-intentioned people were misled by this maneouvre and a motion was passed requesting that the FoL Secretary J. Knox investiga and report on the situation.
At the
This omission was rectified in a backhanded way by Andersen who leapt up to oppose a motion "condemning the Ethiopian regime" He claimed that the Ethiopian government was a military government but it was also a "socialist" government which had "brought great benefits to the working people." Without enlarging on these "benefits" Andersen again tried his favourite trick of questioning the source of information — when in doubt blame the capitalist press.
Not to be out done by Andersen in supporting Ethiopian fascism Ken Douglas dismissed exiled Ethiopian critics of the regime as being all "sons and daughters of the rich". He added that the arming of the Ethiopian people was somehow a proof of democracy in that country, not mentioning that the people were being armed with Soviet guns to be marched off in a fascist movement against the Eritrean People's Liberation movement.
All these efforts on behalf of the Soviet imperialists were to no avail. At the conclusion of the debate the conference passed a motion condemning the denial of human rights in Ethiopia.
After this debate the SUP circulated a rumour that the Ethiopia debate had been staged by right wingers in order to discredit K. Douglas and topple him from the FoL executive.
The fact that Douglas was returned to the executive as the third highest polling candidate (with 523 votes out of 535 cast) shows that the rumour was nonsense. The truth of the matter is that almost all the right voted for Douglas having learned since the last conference that he was certainly no genuine militant on the national executive.
The North Island's central volcanic plateau was once wholly covered with native podocarp forest Inevitably, this was greatly reduced during the period of Maori and European settlement The habitat range and survival chances of many of New Zealand's unique native birds shrunk dramatically during this time, several species became extinct
We are left today with a few small but valuable unlogged remnants of the original forest These areas are rich in the native wildlife that remains to us. In particular, these forests represent important refuges for some of the less common and more sensitive native bird species — including the kokako, kaka and kakariki (native parakeets).
The Wildlife Service has therefore asked for an early cessation of logging in all virgin forests in the central North Island The Service also believes a "Biosphere Reserve" should be established in this region, as a New Zealand contribution to an international programme designed to protect examples of the world's most outstanding natural forests and wildlife communities.
Most New Zealanders probably agree that these remaining forests should now be reserved. However, before this can be done the Forest Service logging programme must be stopped. For despite strong public support for a policy of preserving these forests, the Forest Service has just announced its intention to prolong commercial log production for as long as possible. Recently published logging plans for the West Taupo forests conflict sharply with the Wildlife Service's plan for reserves in areas of outstanding wildlife value — as the map at right shows very clearly.
The podocarp forests are special in themselves Diverse, luxuriant, heavily timbered, these forests contain mixed associations of the big podocarp trees — totara, matai, rimu, tanekaha, miro and kahikatea — together with up to 200 other native plants including ferns, climbers and orchids. Such forests are rare today They once grew on lowland plains and valleys throughout New Zealand, these are the forests the pioneers knew However, only pocket-handkerchief stands remain in these areas now.
The last significant stands of these great mixed podocarp forests lie on the volcanic plateau. The forests have retreated to the fringes of the plateau, and even here, the scattered remnant stands have been reduced by two-thirds since the second World! War. But unlogged areas worthy of protection still survive in Pureora. Waihaha. Whinnaki and Erua forests. These must be saved.
In the virgin forest, the imprint of ancient natural processes may be seen and marvelled at. These podocarp forests have their evolutionary origins in the vast forests of the prehistoric continent of Condwanaland, over two hundred million years ago. The islands of New Zealand subsequently drifted away from Condwanaland and the forests have survived and evolved through the upheavals of mountain building, the ice ages, and the volcanic ash showers. Modern science reveals the forests to be an ancient living organism, shaped by natural forces over immense periods of time, yet still resembling — more than any other of the world's forests — the Mesozoic forests of Condwanaland. We are the custodians of a New Zealand heritage of world interest. Yet we now find that for a period of the earths history almost too brief to be significant, man and the wild forest have come to a parting of the way. The Forest Service proposal to prolong and extend the selection logging of these last mixed podocarp forests threatens an unjustified and irretrievable loss to conservation. It must be fought.
341, 160 New Zealanders signed the Maruia Declaration petition, seeking an end to the logging of virgin forests (except in Westland) by
Most North Islanders now want to preserve their remaining forest, in its manifold richness, believing that it has very much to offer future generations People sense too that the native forest and its wildlife has a right to exist.
What about the people who work in the sawmills? The map above shows that the native forests which need to be saved are located close to large plantations of exotic pines — the largest in the southern hemisphere, in fact. If the Government can't find enough pine logs to take to the sawmills in place of native logs then it isn't trying hard enough.
The first loyally of a sawmill worker will naturally be to his job and his family Despite this many workers are unhappy about the continued desecration of the forests The Maori people of the Pureora district, including the Barryville sawmill workers, held meetings during the Pureora protest. They decided to ask the Prime Minister to supply exotic logs to their sawmill instead of logging more native forest their elder Pakira Tutaki telegrammed the Prime Minister: "Too much of our heritage has been lost my people do not want to cut any more native trees at Pureora".
Write to the Minister of Forests Mr Venn Young, and tell him your views about the West Taupo forests and their wildlife Mr Young has invited comments from the public up to 31 May, after which ho will make a final decision Public opinion could have a strong effect on this decision.
You don't have to be an expert to comment on the future of these forests, but if you would like more detailed information, you can write to the Native Forests Action Council using the tear-off coupon at right Also, detailed seminar papers on the West Taupo forests and wildlife can be seen at Forest Service offices
If you would like to further support the effort to save these forests, join other conservationists for the big Queens Birthday Weekend gathering in Taupo. June 3-5 The gathering is being organized by ECO. the national federation of conservation organizations Bus trips will visit Pureora Whirinaki, and other forests around the edge of Tongariro National Park. There will be worthwhile walks in the forest and an opportunity to see selection logging: also an exciting and informative programme of talks, discussions and social events A weekend For the whole family'
Fill in the coupon at right to
In recent months a great controversy has raged over US plans to produce and deploy the neutron bomb. A type of tactical nuclear weapon, the neutron bomb kills mainly by an intense flux of neutrons without producing a relatively wide-ranging blast. It is a warhead delivered to the battlefield by either a missile or howitzer. The neutrons readily penetrate armour, making it suitable for use against armoured attacks such as would be launched by the Warsaw Pact forces in Europe. The severely irradiated troops die within a few minutes up to a period of one month.
All nuclear weapons kill by a combination of heat, blast force and radiation. As the yield is reduced the relative balance of these effects changes. The previous tactical nuclear weapons of 10 kton yield produce severe destruction and fatal radiation doses out to 1 km from the detonation point. There is some blast damage and little radiation at 1.5 km
Gamma radiation and neutrons predominate in the output from a 1 kton bomb. Such a warhead detonated above a battlefield destroys the buildings, tanks and other vehicles and people within a relatively small radius. But the irradiation area reaches out further than for previous tactical nuclear weapons. If a neutron bomb were detonated 130—200 m above a battlefield, total destruction would occur within a 130 m radius about a point below where it was detonated. All victims within this radius would die in a period ranging from a few minutes to two days.
The central nervous system is affected. Victims within a radius of 1—2 km would survive a week or more, while those within 2—2.5 km would live at least a month. Before death they would suffer effects ranging from bleeding under the skin and gums to vomiting, diarrhoea, high fever and eventually coma. Victims more than 2.5 km away would not be killed or disabled — they suffer long term effects such as eventual development of leukaemia.
While provoking justified disgust in many people, US plans to deploy the neutron bomb have given the Soviet leadership a pretext for launching a fierce, hypocritical and nauseating propaganda campaign. In January Brezhnev circulated a letter to NATO heads of government warning them not to support deployment of the neutron bomb. Soviet diplomats bullied Western politicians at receptions. TASS denounced the neutron bomb as "a barbarous weapon", claiming that "those seized with neutron madness look like the inmates of a mad house". Other Soviet statements claimed that the neutron bomb was "capitalist", "cannibalistic" and "inhumane".
What lies behind this frantic hatred of the neutron bomb displayed by a country which itself deploys thousands of missiles carrying warheads up to megatons in yeild capable of blasting all the cities in the world off the face of the earth.
The answer lies in the growing rivalry between the two superpowers, the Soviet Union and the United States, for world domination. The strategic forces for this rivalry is Europe. Outside the two superpowers themselves, Europe is the most important centre of modern technology. It has a highly skilled and well educated labour labour force for exploitation, innumerable economic, financial and political connections with the rest of the world, particularly the sources of raw materials in the third world. Whoever controls Europe is in the box seat.
The two superpowers confront each other most directly in Europe. The Warsaw Pact forces are in an offensive posture, while the NATO forces are on the defensive. In Europe the Warsaw Pact forces outnumber NATO by 1.4 to 1 in troops, 2.9 to 1 in tanks, 1.4 to 1 in planes and 3.7 to 1 in artillery pieces. The Warsaw Pact forces are geared to a high speed, surprise attack in depth by massed armour. Soviet military experts expect their tank divisions to advance at a rate of 70 miles per day — more than twice the rate of Panzers in
NATO defence is based on laser-guided anti-tank weapons and ordinary tactical nuclear weapons. The problem with such tactical nuclear weapons is that if they are used by NATO forces their own population, territory and industry will be devastated. This is politically unacceptable to NATO member nations — especially Germany, where tactical nuclear weapons are most likely to be used — so targets are severely restricted. NATO strategists look to the neutron bomb to reduce the damage caused by nuclear war fighting while presenting a substantial deterent to the Soviet Union. It is hoped that the neutron bomb will be useful in blunting a massed armoured thrust of the type that the Soviet Union is undoubtedly planning for West Europe.
That is the real reason why the Soviet Union is making such a clamour about the neutron bomb. But in the manner of all aggressors, the Soviet leaders are trying to cover up their real intentions in a cloud of pacifist and humanitarian claptrap.
If the neutron bomb is "barbaric", does this make other nuclear weapons civilised and humane? Of course not! All nuclear weapons are barbaric and inhumane — including the thousands of ordinary tactical nuclear weapons already deployed by the Soviet Union in Europe. The inhumanity of nuclear weapons did not prevent the Soviet Union moving in 6 missile carrying submarines into the Baltic Sea last year. Although diesel-driven and carrying old fashioned 1200 km intermediate range missiles (about 18 in all), these submarines threaten with total destruction. 36 West European cities, including Paris Amsterdam, Brussels, Copenhagen, Dusseldorf, Bonn, Oslo and possibly London. This may be humane to Brezhnev; others would call it something else!
And just like its present behaviour over the neutron bomb, the Soviet Union charged Sweden with "sharpening tensions in Nordic Europe" and threatening "detente" when the latter country protested against the presence of the missile-carrying submarines in the Baltic Sea.
The charge that the neutron bomb is "capitalist" is ludicrous. Weapons do not have a class character. A rifle is a rifle, a tank a tank, and a tactical nuclear weapon a tactical nuclear weapon. It is the war in which the weapons are used which has the class character. As Lenin said: "War is the continuation of policy by other means. All wars are inseparable from the political systems that engender them. The policy which a given state, a given class within that state pursued for a long time before the war is inevitably continued by that same class during the war, the form of action alone being changed." (War and Revolution.
weapons, particularly if they are the leaders of a state-monopoly capitalist and fascist state like the Soviet Union.
The charge that the neutron bomb will "sabotage detente" and be a "challenge" to the Soviet Union is nothing but a thinly veiled threat. How is it that the US neutron bomb threatens "detente", while the Soviet Union's recently deployed missile, the SS—20, its Backfire bomber and its recent deployment of missile carrying submarines in the Baltic are not? The SS—20 is a mobile missile carried on a tracked tank like vehicle, with a range of at least 3500 km it carries three independently targetable warheads each with a yield many times greater than a neutron bomb. The SS — 20 is a modified version of the SS —16, a three-stage strategic missile which the Soviet Union has produced and tested but not deployed. The SS—16 carries a single warhead and has a range of at least 8800km. The SS — 20 is a two-stage rocket easily convertible into an SS — 16. This would enable it to be rapidly converted into a strategic missile in the event of war. With large numbers of 22—20s, the Soviet Union has potential ICBM's not covered by the SALT ceiling of 2400 delivery vehicles. How is it that this missile which now threatens the major cities of West Europe and China does not "sabotage detente"?
What all this shows is that there is no such thing as "detente" between the two superpowers. Both superpowers are fighting hard to get an edge over the other, the talk about "detente" being an aspect of their rivalry. The "detente" policy is meant to lull the vigilance of the other superpower and the peoples of the world, while each prepares for war with the other.
As far as their capacity to murder is concerned, the hydrogen bomb, the atomic bomb and the neutron bomb are all nuclear weapons, and there is no difference between them as far as one being humane and another barbarous. Actually, there is evidence that the neutron bomb would reduce the number of human casualties compared with other tactical nuclear weapons. Some have claimed that the neutron bomb would reduce the destructive effects of previous tactical nuclear weapons on the civilian population and environment by 90 per cent. There would be fewer human casualties, as well as lessened damage to buildings, bunkers, tanks and other vehicles. The statement that the neutron bomb destroys only "life" is false. All nuclear weapons should be prohibited and destroyed for the sake of humanity. What kind of logic is it which says that the US neutron bomb, not yet deployed, is barbarous because it kills while allegedly leaving property intact, but says nothing about the Soviet missiles which destroy both people and propety on a much greater scale? It has been justly said that in the controversy over the neutron bomb, what people see are not "the inmates of a mad house" but the swindlers in the Kremlin!
May Council at Lincoln College. The compromise Council which will set NZUSA back on its feet and secure its effectiveness as the voice of New Zealand students? Or a series of superficial decisions which do not get at the core of NZUSA's problems and thus cannot be expected to contribute much to unity?
Certainly nothing happend which will guarantee that those campuses threatening withdrawal will decide to stay in. Nevertheless, the kinds of solutions arrived at (dropping the IVP, altering the voting regulations) may be all that NZUSA can itself do at such a level. It must still prove itself on campus, and that has always and will always be the case.
More importantly, those people on the various campuses who do believe in NZUSA must continue to fight for it. NZUSA, with full campus participation, can be more than the sum of its constituents. But those constituents alone can determine this; they are the ones who hold the key to its success or failure.
This week we report on the two major events at Council: the solution arrived at out of the report of the Working Party into the future of NZUSA, and the methods adopted to cope with a $6,000 deficit budget.
In future issues we will be looking at the policies of NZUSA and the ways in which they have been formulated.
There were two notable absences from Council: James Movick and Dave Macpherson. James is back in Fiji, his case still pending in the Court of Appeal. Dave has resigned from NZUSA and is shortly to return to Australia. We hope to run an interview with him next week.
These are the Standing Committees of NZUSA. Their Coordinators now have moving and seconding rights on National Executive, but cannot vote. NOSAC is now practically the only body capable of actioning any policy relating to overseas students, while WRAC has since its inception been the body responsible for most policy on women.National Office:
Constituents:
NZUSA went into May Council with a budgetted deficit of $6,650. Yet ruthless cutting of expenditure and a few financial fiddles gave us back a balanced budget. Most of the money came from salaries (there's no IVP anymore and we won't have an EVP or a second Research Officer for a month or two) and an unexpected increase in levy revenue.
Education and administration get a minor increases, National, International and Research have taken minor cuts, WRAC gets a little more while NOSAC gets considerably more.
It wasn't an easy process. From 7.30 pm on Saturday night until 3.30 the next morning the financial whizzes and the various lobby groups fought long and hard.
The session began with the setting of priorities. Each commission had already set priorities in its own area, although voting for priorities is done by delegations.
NZUSA priorities are now:
Unemployment (including student employment)
Bursaries
Overseas students
Abortion
Civil Liberties
After a short discussion it was decided that the President would not have any priorities as s/he has already been given the direct responsibility for Overseas students and must be involved in everything anyway,
Priorities for the General Vice-President are:
Unemployment
Civil Liberties
Maori Rights (including land rights and domestic racism)
Energy and the Environment
Pacific
The GVP also has specific responsibility until June 16 for Soweto Day activities
Priorities for the Education and Welfare Vice PresidentBursariesLecturer TrainingStudent Services(in the order: Student employment, student health, child-care facilities, dentistry).
Priorities for the Women's Rights Action Committee (WRAC):
Abortion
Research on women in universities
Women Students' Economic position
Women's studies report.
The National Overseas Students Action Committee has no priorities but is of course reponsible for all policy relating to Overseas students.
The next thing up was the budget. Although an earlier Finance and Administration Commission had already managed to pare the deficit down to $876 the Auckland delegates had it in their heads that $6000 was still to be found. So Mery Prince moved: That NZUSA accept from AUSA a second mortgage on the building at 32 Blair Street for $6,000 interest free to be repaid
Auckland's Chris Gosling seemed to be the major force behind the move. Prince supported him, while their treasurer Julian Leigh was clearly against it. Auckland's argument was basically that as they are a rich campus and NZUSA needed money this was an easy way of solving the problem. Gosling made some fine speeches but didn't ever get beyond this position, talking always in terms of easing the sticky position. The underlying assumption to his argument was that there will be a significant levies increase for next year.
At first it seemed like an attractive proposal. . . but only at first. Several people tried very hard to explain that a loan could not solve the problem. Quite simply, NZUSA's deficit budget was a problem of income. A loan is not income.
A levies increase is of course desirable from the financial point of view, but it is rather difficult to tell three campuses threatening to pull out that they must pay more money into an organisation they don't fully believe in. If the levy goes up next year and it's a big 'if the increase will be marginal. Would even Victoria, where relatively strong support for NZUSA exists, stomach an increase when our own fee is going up as well?
Victoria kept up its argument than any debate on a loan was irrelevant until we knew more clearly where we stood, calculators were out and heads were low as people around the table went over and over the figures to find ways of cutting expenditure, but for a while longer no progress was made. Nobody wanted to cut the campaign budgets, recognising that if NZUSA is to become more worthwhile in the eyes of students it must be seen to do more.
But in meetings like this, a saviour always comes along every couple of hours hours. This time it was Canterbury's Nigel Petrie, who announced he had been through the budget and created a surplus of $57. Auckland's motion was withdrawn, and Petrie read out the figures, He had cut out $500 for a Presidential trip to the Asian Students Association conference, chopped a bit off WRAC, eliminated the International budget (except those amounts already spent and $100 for the Soweto Day activities), increased NOSAC's allowance by only $500 and trimmed nearly every other campaign budget.
A lot of the proposals made sense to everybody, a lot were contentious, but Petrie had managed to do the thing which had eluded all others that night, give a specific basis to the debate. Following shortly after this Otago's Rod Carr suggested that NZUSA not pay $1,000 to STB for rent of the office space at Blair Street. NZUSA owns the building but STB is the commercial arm; money is supposed to flow from one to the other . . . it's complicated but the extra money suddenly seemed very easy to accept. This move became known as the "rent fiddle".
Unemployment, the major priority, finally received only $300 to be spent on three posters and leaflets. Bursaries was pushed up to $ 1440 (at least $ 1,000 of which has been spent). International was eventually given $478, $268 of which will be spent by the James Movick Appeal Fund. WRAC ended up $123 better off.
NOSAC was towards the end of the budget. Every time money was found there was a sort of tacit approval that at least some of it would go to NOSAC. The rent fiddle, together with a few other minor adjustments had created a figure of $1,540 to be allocated. But by the time the meeting actually began to consider NOSAC this had been whittled away to $500 odd.
To give NOSAC the increase it needed Victoria moved that the National Officers' salaries be reduced by $500 each. The present incumbents support the idea, and VUWSA has long been arguing for it, but there are a lot of opponents. Bob Lack (one of the student — appointed directors of the STB Board) was in the chair and made his views plain by resolutely steering the meeting away from discussing the matter. John Blincoe, ex-President and Chairperson of the Working Party, wrote a two page speech in case Lack's tactics should prove no no avail. The break came when Accountant Peter MacLeod suddenly stuck his head down and came up with the necessary cash. NOSAC didn't get all they asked for. People began to realise the budget could balance without any loan, without taking a drastic move over salaries and without knocking too much out of campaign allocations.
As Andrew Guest stated, it is a dangerous precedent to play around with salaries when other things want more money. But Victoria's motion, although prompted by the then current situation, was based on a principle. National Officers get $5757 pa. Not a lot, but well in excess of any constituent president. Yet it falls far short of any commonly calculated "fair return for the work done". National Officers don't take on the jobs for the money, so perhaps NZUSA should fully recognise this. The VUWSA proposal knocks them back to $70 pw in the hand, which is not a trifling amount, and still well ahead of our own President's $3000 pa.
NZUSA underwent some changes at
This Working Party was set up in
Rather than summarising the report, which is available from Lindy Cassidy
While superficially this may seem a
NZUSA can be modified, as an
This appears to be the nub of the
The problem with LCSA and its
Their dissatisfaction is more akin to the dissatisfaction groups within other universities feel towards their own association (as perhaps the science students at Victoria generally do not subscribe to the policies of VUWSA). I believe that Lincoln College students must become more aware of the position in which they are placed, and should re-examine their complaints with NZUSA, taking account of the principles of democracy.
How far should the 38,000 other students in NZUSA go to accommodate the wishes of 1400 Lincoln College students who have a disproportionate voting power (and no one is suggesting that that voting power should be reduced) in the interests of democracy?
It became apparent from May Council (particularly during the discussion on the Working Party report) that the other constituent associations were prepared to make large concessions to LCSA in order to try and keep them in NZUSA. Only time will tell whether the offers of compromise will be accepted in the spirit in which they were made.
The Working Party made only two important recommendations. One concerned the structure of National Office, the other was an attempt to make the policies emerging from Councils more representative of the views expressed there.
Much discussion centred around this first proposal. The structure that was finally determined upon for National Office was:
President
Full time elected with special responsibility for overseas students.
General Vice President
Full time elected with responsibility for National and International work
Education and Welfare Vice President
Full time elected
Two standing committee Coordinators
Elected by NZUSA and paid an honorarium, (the standing committees are WRAC and NOSAC)
Two Research Officers
Full time appointed with responsibility for Welfare, Education and Overseas students.
Secretary — Accountant
Full time appointed
These changes grew out of the Working Party's recommendations. The most important and obvious is the removal of the International Vice President. While there was much discussion on this point the reasons for dropping the position were mainly on a practical basis.
Basically there was a feeling that this represented a compromise that would go a long way to keeping Massey, Canterbury and Lincoln in NZUSA (although ironically Canterbury had the week before passed a motion at its SRC supporting retention of, the position — "There's just no way to stack an SRC" Mike Lee was heard to complain). The success of this measure will have to be gauged.
Ignoring the controversial nature of the actual decision, it represented a very important stage in what might be called the "Compromise Council". It was the first time that any of the ardent supporters of NZUSA had been prepared to make any major concessions to the associations which were dissatisfied with the existing form of NZUSA.
This dissatisfaction had stemmed from the belief that it is completely inappropriate for NZUSA to have policy on matters "completely outside it ambit", like international policy. Scrapping the IVP does not of course eliminate the policy, (and indeed much of it still remains on the books). However removing the officer who who was supposed to action that policy, has a simple downgrading effect in relation to the so-called relevant issues of welfare and education.
One major stumbling block (a phrase I shouldn't use. It occurred so frequently in the International Commission that it was moved, That all stumbling blocks do lie upon the table) to scrapping the IVP was that s/he has had a special responsibility for the welfare of overseas students, and the special problems they faced.
It was recognised at the outset that NOSAC would have to be strengthened to the extent that it could take over the work that had formerly fallen to the IVP; The feeling of the meeting seemed to be that eventually NOSAC will become a fraternal organisation rather than a subservient body.
The other main argument used to eliminate the IVP position was of the mundane and financial type. Before Council NZUSA appeared to be heading for a budgeted deficit of around $6000, with one less National Officer most of this money could be saved.
There were a variety of reasons why it was chosen to scrap an elected rather than an appointed position (eg. have only one Research Officer). It was believed that a Research Officer would represent a much sounder use of "scarce financial resources". A lot of NZUSA's essential work is in writing submissions, sitting on committees and so on. Fronting up on issues at the campus level can still be done by the remaining elected officers.
Also there was the important point that it was not at all clear that there would be any candidates for such a position. Absolute majority or silent majority?
Another main topic of discussion centred around the voting procedures at Council.
The Working Party believed that "much of the expressed dissatisfaction about NZUSA is in essence dissatisfaction about the policies of NZUSA and the processes by which these policies were made". One of the recommendations that they made was that all policy motions should attract two thirds of all the possible votes (ie 28 out of the possible 42).
This provision must already be met for any amendment to the constitution, and it was generally felt that to require ordinary policy to be subject to such a stringent restriction would be unnecessary. Further, it would mean that Auckland with either Canterbury or Otago would be able to block anything the rest of NZUSA wished to do. The idea of a 28 majority was pretty quickly dropped, in favour of an absolute majority, or 22 votes. A motion establishing this procedure was passed unanimously.
This still ignores one other objection: there is now no such things (in effective voting terms) as an abstention. Many constituents use abstentions to register the fact that they have no policy on a particular issue. They do not mean to actually vote against the motion. The record will still show their abstention but it will count as a negative vote.
Lincoln's case is interesting. Because LCSA belives NZUSA should not have policy on International issues it abstains on most international motions. The new absolute majority system means that it is theoretically forced to decide on all such issues. It can no longer avoid taking an active part in deciding NZUSA policy.
In fact all constituents must now make an effort to get policy on the issues expected to come up at Council. The lack of preparation which has hitherto marked many delegations' role in Council is to be actively discouraged.
Peter McLeod made the important point that the new system will ensure a more representative policy. He pointed in particular to a motion on the Middle—East, which was passed under the old system 2 to 1 with 4 abstentions. This was not a policy which necessarily reflected the views of the majority of students.
While this system looks very nice in principle it does overlook one very important point. Delegates are always supposed to vote under instruction from their SRC's; Consequently they are not open to persuasion, as they might be under other situations. The idea of trying to sway people to your own point of view to obtain a positive consensus is thus denied. The scheme seemed to work fairly well for the duration of this Council and it is to be hoped that this will continue.
One other recommendation of the Working Party which was adopted was one to have the complete voting pattern for each motion recorded and circulated with the minutes. The stated aim was to increase students' awareness of how their delegates are voting. While sensible enough in theory, the proposal fails to recognise that while minutes for Councils are freely available they are not widely available and many students do not seem interested in availing themselves of this opportunity. Be that as it may, all NZUSA can do is to make them available for those who wish to use them. It is for the constituents to seek to raise the level of awareness of their members in the workings of the national organisation.
Each year, overseas students in New Zealand hold an International Students Congress to meet together, to attend forums and workshops, play sport, and not least this year, participate in cultural concerts.
The
For most, overseas students just seem to fill up the library or gym and hang around in groups talking amongst themselves. The ISC gave the New Zealanders a chance to become part of the overseas community for five days. It meant not only learning about the various home countries, but also allowed us to get an insight of the way overseas students view New Zealand — especially in areas that affect them most like immigration laws.
Although not quite to the extent of last year's ISC in Wellington, there soon developed an atmosphere of genuine friendship among the participants: The huge cultural concert on the second night added tremendously to this with items from almost every resident nationality. Many of the Asian items depicted the life of peasants and ordinary people through dance and song. The evening finished with the traditional Chinese red silk dance — a spectacular display of coordination with eight dancers and 30 foot long red silk streamers.
Most of the day's activities were taken up with forums and discussions. The first forum, on women in the Third World was addressed by Kathy Lee, who is involved in the Australian Overseas Women's Activities movement. She stressed that although women in societies like New Zealand are oppressed, the plight of women in the third world, especially Asia, is made even more acute by economic circumstances. When you can't get enough food to feed your family it is difficult to become directly involved in struggling for many of the rights claimed by New Zealand women.
But unlike many of the feminist groups in New Zealand women in the third world do not see their enemy as simply being men, but the social conditions at large. An understanding of the economic nature of women's oppression is important for all people, women and men, and all must join together if change is to be achieved.
The organisers had built in a session dealing with New Zealand. This consisted of a forum on the Maori land question (addressed by Grant Hawke from Bastion Point) and New Zealand's economic crisis. This turned out to be a lively session, although it was dominated by the New Zealanders present.
The sports day in the middle of the Congress was an eye opener for the New Zealanders present. Most people in this country consider themselves to be sports conscious. The Asian students at the Congress however, showed a great enthusiasm and skill for sport that would embarrass all but the best kiwis.
The evening session following the sports was, not surprisingly, a film and slide show. These were on Thailand and New Caledonia and presented the situation in those countries in some depth.
The second of the Congress's guests from the Australian Overseas Student Service, B. Ang, addressed the session on the overseas student movement in Australia. He pointed out the disadvantages of an overseas student organisation becoming dominated by the host organisation. The Australian Union of Students have recently thrown out the OSS and blocked their funds. OSS now operates without any money, although it still gains wide support from the overseas community.
The theme was carried on by Lisa Sacksen who spoke on the New Zealand situation. She urged overseas student to develop a self reliant organisation which would have fraternal ties with NZUSA but not be entirely dependent on it. These calls have not fallen on deaf cars — plans are afoot to make the National Overseas Student Action Committee (NOSAC), presently a standing committee of NZUSA, more autonomous.
The last forum was on education. The main feeling which came from the discussion was that university education should serve the interest of the peoples of that country rather than train people to fit into the top layer of society.
The final plenary discussed motions on a wide range of subjects including human rights, student welfare and amendments to the constitution to make NOSAC more flexible.
A special series of motions were dedicated to the work which James Movick had done for the Congress and the overseas student movement before being expelled from the country. It was plain that his leadership was absent from the Congress and this made it a slightly sadder and less dynamic event than the previous year.
Despite this, the Congress ended with a powerful feeling of unity in the traditional mini-cultural concert and the farewell social.
For the New Zealanders, a farewell of this kind is a rare experience, as the overseas students possess a much more group conscious state of mind. By that time we knew many people there and were able to throw ourselves into the celebration.
It is very important that students here make an attempt to understand the situation of our overseas friends. Theirs is not such a happy lot. The ISC is the only time where they can get together in a national level, and come next May, New Zealand students would be well advised attending it in Auckland. All who went from Wellington agree that the experience was both valuable and enjoyable.
The session on Welfare was perhaps the most important of the whole Congress. Not only did it outline the discriminatory restrictions facing overseas students in this country, but it clearly highlighted the political nature of that discrimination. Welfare is no less a political issue for overseas and New Zealand students than anything else they may become involved in.
The main speaker was Brian Lyth, the Overseas Students Counsellor at Auckland. He identified the following areas of contention:
Permits for overseas students are issued for one year only, and reissued in March if satisfactory academic progress has been made. This leaves the students without any legal right to be in the country during January and February. In many cases this might be merely a technical problem, but it remains at the Minister's discretion. Compare it to the situation in Australia, where permits are issued for a three year term. Overseas students are told their permit will not be renewed by a form letter from the Immigration Department. This letter tells them they have 14 days to leave the country. At the bottom it states that if they wish to appeal they can apply in writing to the Education Advisory Committee (EAC). No procedure for this application is stated, no indication of what should go in the letter is given, and no suggestion is made that such an application is a part of the process which is becoming more and more built in to the whole system of allowing overseas students into the country. Overseas students do not receive a bursary and must pay full fees, and yet because of a recent decision by Frank Gill they are not allowed to work at any time except during the long vacation. This regulation even makes provision for employer penalties if they hire overseas students. Thus the government is encouraging only the rich to come, and developing a system where they will be isolated from New Zealand circumstances while they are here. Overseas students cannot register as unemployed, get any sort of unemployment benefit, qualify for any special work scheme, or get any of the relief currently available to New Zealand students during the holidays. Up until two weeks ago overseas students who married New Zealanders had to undergo a two year probation period before they were granted citizenship. This was designed to discourage "marriages of convenience", despite the fact that there is absolutely no evidence at all to suggest such things exist among the overseas student population. Those who did want to marry New Zealanders had to undergo an, embarassing series of questions aimed at "weeding out" the "frauds". Cabinet has now decided (after pressure from NZUSA and the overseas student movement) to abolish this provision, but doubtless questions about authenticity will persist. Under a new regulation (perhaps designed to counter the concession made on "marriages of convenience") overseas students will no longer be allowed to stay for their graduation ceremony. This flies in the face of years of established practice, and seems to be entirely without purpose. Overseas students are usually allowed up to five years in the country. If they finish their degree in three years they may spend the remaining two gaining practical experience. If it takes them longer (and this is often the case due to language difficulties, racism, the strenuous workload placed upon them, etc. their working time is diminished. Thus those who may be in greater need of practical experience are least able to get it. Overseas students are subject to continual surveillance by their home government's representatives and the New Zealand government. This is in direct contradiction to what is meant to be the democratic spirit of our society and the generally accepted idea that non-residents shall not be subject to treatment which New Zealanders are not supposed to receive. The language test (LATOS) administered to all applicants for study permits in New Zealand is framed in such a way that many New Zealand students would probably have difficulty passing it. Academic results, upon which overseas students must rely if they are to be admitted, are not released until late in the piece so the students have very little time to a) decide to come, and b) make all the necessary arrangements. Consequently they often arrive late and have very little time to settle in before term starts. Decisions on overseas students' status are usually made without any consultation with the students or academics. The decision on the numbers of overseas students to allowed in next year has already been made, although it is kept secret. Thus this important decision has been taken before many other factors concerning overseas students are universities generally are known. Most importantly of all, this country has no written policy on Immigration. The Labour Department, which currently deals with the matter is ill-equipped and when it comes to overseas students (who suffer far more from discriminatory practices than any other migratory group) is way out of its depth.
Brian Lyth made some valuable suggestions for overseas students in trouble with the department. An application to the EAC need not be long, but should contain (if possible) support from academic staff. This is the most important thing. Medical reasons for not doing well the previous year are the next priority, and personal reasons are last. Anyone who has had their permit denied should contact NZUSA and the local welfare officer as quickly as possible (at Victoria, see the Director of Student Welfare, Ian Boyd). You should keep a copy of all correspondence.
New Zealand is one of the cheapest countries for overseas students to get a university education. We thus have a special responsibility to the people of Malaysia and elsewhere. Recent decisions by the New Zealand government (especially on the cutbacks) seem aimed at making our educational servies available only to the elite in the various countries. If we in New Zealand recognise the oppression that exists in those countries we must also recognise that by helping perpetuate the rule of the elite we are doing our bit to maintain that oppression. This is the heart of the overseas students' struggle.
The possibilities of theatre as a medium for children's entertainment and education are limitless, yet theatre for children is underdeveloped.
Within the last few years. Theatre 87, Downstage, Circa and Unity have entered into the children's area, but a lot of work is still to be done before the understanding and appreciation of theatre for children reaches the level of adult theatre.
Television and picture theatres are providing entertainment for children; but take a closer look at it! Plastic, action packed, loud, colourful presentations are packing the children in, they may not provide interesting, imaginative, live entertainment, but because of availability, movies are popular.
Touring parties doing children's shows have been very successful — the demand is there, and something needs to be done about it. So why is there no theatre for children other than in school holiday time?
However . . . Unity theatre is going to be running children's theatre on Saturday mornings from the 27th of May, with Badjelly at Unity, then Winnie the pooh, and in late June Grimm's Fairy Tales. This is much needed and appreciated, as when Theatre 87 closed, so did continuous children's theatre.
In the May school holidays Wellington theatres have put on three programmes for children, they have been exceptionally well patronised playing to full houses.
Unity theatre has put on Winnie the Pooh, Theatre 87 has put on Badjelly the Witch at Wellington Repertory theatre, and Downstage has produced School for clowns; providing varied and interesting entertainment.
Unity theatre has been having some difficulties lately, so it is very pleasing to see them back in action, and putting on a children's show. They are aiming to keep their theatre open as often as possible with quality productions.
Winnie the Pooh, by A.A. Milne, adapted and directed by Ralph McAlister has been put on by a cast of educators from Wellington Teachers College. They have been playing to over-full houses. Des Kelly, Lousie Upston, Ewen Upston and Tim Hyde make up the cast, with lighting and music operated by Michael Carney.
The show was professional and appealing to the audience (who were able to participate) and consisted of varied extracts from A.A. Milne. Two actors stood out as wonderful actors and mimes, Des Kelly as Eyore and Louise Upston as Piglet. However the whole cast is worthy of praise. Working within another set is hard to do, but they managed it successfully.
A.A. Milne's works are amazing children's entertainment, best catering for the 4 to 10 age bracket. Unity should be pleased with its effort and should renew some of its depleted audience with this show. The company aim to make non-threatening children's shows with the audience doing the decision-making. Looks like some interesting children's theatre should emerge. (If anyone is interested in Unity, an important meeting will be held on the 28th of May).
Lewis Rowe's Theatre 87 has produced Badjelly the Witch at Wellington Repertory theatre, much to the delight of audiences who have seen it. Of the three productions offered for children, this show has the most imaginative involvement, ability to enthuse to a frenzy and the largest audience appeal. Witty dialogue, colour, good children's music, audience involvement and lots of exciting activity form a very successful combination.
There's Badjelly, the wickedest witch in the whole world, who turns children into sausages and likes boy-girl chow mein. Dullboot the flabby giant: If he'd known there's be visitors he would have worn his other knickers. Lucy cowpaddy across the river; Tim the child who wishes there was a dairy on the mountain; Rose, the other child, "Badjelly may turn Lucy into a toasted sandwhich!"; Binklebonk, who has to watch out for knicker nickers; the mouse who didn't like the cold, even as a banana. There's the super worm Mudwiggle who's a super strong Kung Fu worm, and Jim (the eagle) who's itching to do some high powered work on that Badjelly Dame.
All of the actors excelled themselves and the audience participated constantly helping locate people, singing songs from Jim's album and lobbying for favourites.
Jan Prettijohns directed Downstage's stage truck company in a play called School for Clowns, by F.W. Waechter, translated by Ken Campbell.
The production staff of five did a professional job with the help of Rawiri doing percussion accompaniment. Although the production was meticulous, with well choreographed action and colourful interesting costumes, I feel the play was too highbrow for an audience of young children. School for Clowns shows an amusing group of clowns in a learning situation, but its suitability for children is doubtful. How many children are able to understand phrases like "chastisement" and a clown complaining of the classes' "tempestuous effervescent personalities"?
The acting included some brilliant mime and fast action work. If not suitable for children, "Mame" sung under canvas was fun for others.
Wellington should be pleased that it is able to offer a variety of theatre for children, and with the good response that has met these plays, be encouraged to extend and broaden the sphere of theatre entertainment for children, both young and n not so young. The plays presented for the May holidays are a credit to all those involved in their production and success.
Starved opera-goers and all music-lovers can expect a rare treat next month. Under the direction of Ross Harris and Adrian Kiernander on June 15th to 18th, the VUW Music Society will present Gluck's comic opera L'yvrogne Corrigne (The Reformed Drunkard or The Devil's Wedding).
Christoph Gluck (
When he visited London in
The Reformed Drunkard is Gluck's fifth 'comic opera' and was first performed at Schoenbrunn - the summer palace of the Viennese Court - in 1 760. The French opera comique was then the vogue in Vienna and Gluck was quick to take advantage of this new style which featured more natural melodies, spoken dialogue and the use of chorus and ballet. Prior to this work, Gluck had written over twenty operas though his best known works Orfeo ed Euridice and Iphigenie en Aulide were still to come.
Musical director, Ross Harris has kept principle singers hard at work for several weeks already and as one who was lucky enough to sit-in on a rehearsal, I am confident that audiences will find Gluck's music quite delightful. A museum-piece it may well be, but a live performance of a charming eighteenth-century opera shouldn't be missed.
Thursday lunchtime concerts have resumed for the second term. On 25th May we have a programme featuring works by Handel and Copland, and performed by Richard Giese (flute), Mike Rose (guitar) and Margaret Nielsen (piano). For anyone who missed his solo concert in Wellington on May 11th, here is an opportunity to hear Mike Rose, winner of the
The Friends of Old St Pauls have organised a series of concerts to be held on the first Sunday of each month. On May 7th the Wellington Chamber Orchestra gave a concert which was marred only by the presence of a couple of restless children.
Conductor Bill Walden Mills kept tight control of the orchestra and inspired lively performances particularly in the Mozart Violin Concerto in D major. Soloist, Valerie Rigg, played with profession al assurance.
The other major work in the programme was Haydn's Symphony in E flat major - Drumroll - with Paul Barrett on timpani. Prokofief's March from the Love of Three Oranges gave the concert a bright and breezy finish. If this concert is anything to go by, future Sunday afternoons could be well worth a trip down to Thorndon. Admission is free.
Whether SF is called scientifiction, science fiction, space fiction, science fantasy or speculative fiction, it is still a literature of the future. So many different sorts of stories are classified as SF that it is hard to word a definition that will encompass all.
An inherent element in SF is that of speculation — hence the preference of some for the 'speculative fiction' title. This speculation can be of any kind. Today's SF is a far cry from the original hard science stories of the 30's and 40's.
SF writers can speculate on the consequences of many new concepts, whether of the physical sciences, social sciences or the current amalgam sciences. A.E. van Vogt created the science of 'nexialism' in The voyage of the Space Beagle and this amalgam science involved the co-ordination of all the other specialist subjects on the spaceship. Needless to say the sole nexialist aboard ends up running the whole show.
The other element in all SF (or should be) is the fiction element. SF should tell a story. Whether there is a message or vision behind the story or not doesn't matter The story is there to be told and the reader may or may not get anything extra from the story. Of course, some stories are better than others, and a message or a vision can improve a story.
Science is a very grey element in a lot of current SF. The early stories all dealt with scientific extrapolation, but as science has expanded, so too has the range of materials used in SF. Depending on you definition, science is still important in SF, but the sort of science is changing.
If SF is considered as a stream of literature, then the majority of other writing is called mainstream literature. SF likes to grab mainstream success's and claim them as SF successes that have had wider appeal. The huge success of mainstream novels like Brave New World, 1984, On the Beach, and and writers like Vonnegut points to the interaction between the two streams.
SF justifies its existence as a stream of literature. Mainstream contains a number of substreams (mystery, gothic, humour, western, philosophical, etc.) and similarily the same substreams can be found in SF.
Because of its speculative nature, SF can use a far wider range of ideas in a story. Any mainstream category can have its SF equivalent. Aurthur C. Clarke has written a SF western, Isaac Asimov perfected the SF mystery and now has several imitators, Gordon Dickson's Dorsai cycle has a strong military flavour, Philip Jose Farmer introduced alien sex to the genre Larry Niven and Laurence James both have their alternative to James Bond — suitably enhanced by technology, Harry Harrington has introduced various ideas but can be remembered for his excellent SF humour, and Mark Adlard has written about the executives and the management of automated cities of the future.
One of the constantly amazing things about being a frequent SF reader is the variety of new ideas that can be found in new stories. SF writers are always finding some new idea and introducing it in their stories.
Philip Jose Farmer burst onto the scene in The Lovers, a story of sex and aliens. His later work in that direction is collected in Strange Relations. His World of the Tiers series (yet to be finished) deals with an immortal society and their constructed universes, petty squabbles and cultures. The Gate of Time involves alternate time universes. He deals more profoundly with the resurrection of mankind for an experiment in his River-world tetralogy (third volume recently published overseas). To further excercise his talents he is official biographer of Tarzan (and his book Lord Tyger is along similar lines), Doc Savage and he has recently published two stories of Opar in the time before Tarzan arrived. The adventure of the Peerless Peer tells of a humourous encouter between Sherlock Holmes and Tarzan. The Wind Whales of Ishmael tells the sequal to Moby Dick.
SF writers come from a variety of backgrounds to give their contribution to the genre. Some were professional writers from the start — Moorcock and Brunner both began in their teens and haven't slowed since. Others have backgrounds in science and engineering — Asimov has a Ph.D. in biochemistry, Jerry Pournelle was involved with NASA for a long while. Currently even wider fields are contributing. Samuel Delany is the editor of a poetry magazine, Mark Adlard is an executive for a UK steel company, Theodore Sturgeon trained to be a trapeze artist, etc. From all these backgrounds comes the cream of SF. Every writer makes a contribution to the reader, and the genre as a whole.
Harlan Ellison made the comment in Again, Dangerous Visions that there is something special about the SF community. There are regular get togethers where the older established writers will talk to newcomers about the craft of writing. Can you imagine Norman Mailer or Jaqueline Susann or Erich Segal getting together with his (or her) juniors to help them on to the paths of success?
Robin Scott Wilson runs the Clarion workshops — one of the better known and more successful. Such an exercise disproves the George Bernard Shaw quotation: "Those who can, do: Those who cannot, teach."
This is done by having prominent writers talk about writing. The Garion has a very good record, but closer to home, Ursala Le Guin operates a writing workshop in Australia and the resultant efforts are printed in The Altered I (edited by Lee Harding, Norstrilia Press).
So far in this article I have been mainly talking about stories and novels. SF however is not confined to these media.
There is a large following of SF illustrations which make their appearance on book covers, magazines, record album covers and in special art publications (Patrick Woodroffe's Mythopoekon, Roger Dean's Visions or the compilation by Harry Harrison: Great Balls of Fire! — A History of Sex in SF Illustration. There are many others.
The comic medium is distinct from illustration. Comics combine visual art with a story. I don't mean the Walt Disney comics) although they do contain some fantastic elements — I mean a talking duck with a large fortune). Marvel comics contain a lot of SF related material but it would take an expert in the field to discuss it properly — I'm not.
I would like to mention however. New Zealand's own comic book Strips which is exported from Ponsonby every few months. It contains a number of very well drawn strips, including a few serials and some commentary comics — all very adult stuff.
The film medium has been producing a lot of SF material lately after the success of Star Wars and Close Encouters of the Thrid Kind. I will have more to say on that at a later date.
At a more obscure level is the recording medium. Many very talented musicians are recording some SF related albums. The better known are Bowie (Space Oddity, Low, Diamond Dogs, etc.). Pink Floyd (Saucerful of Secrets, Ummagumma, More, Obscured by Clouds, etc.). Sometimes the level of SF is concealed by obscurity, but at other times it is very apparent. This is something I will have more to say about later too.
At this stage it is intended for this article to be followed by more. There is a lot of material that needs more attention and I hope I am able to contribute on a regular basis.
Future topics will include a look at fandom, history, the giants of the genre, SF themes, movies and music. At the same time I welcome any inquiries about anything mentioned here. If there is something you wish to know then I will try to answer. You can write to me c/o Salient.
Lyrical picaresque adventures of a contemporary American drifter. Five Easy Pieces is a product of the rash of American "self-conscious" films that developed in the early 70's. Its relative success may be due to the more thoughtful and coherent approach it criticises American myths. More likely, it is Jack Nicholson's brilliant performance as the drifter, who must confront his rootlessness and his desire for freedom. Bob Rafelson directs.
Wednesday 24 May 2.15 pm.
Both Paul Newman and Robert Redford are in fine form when they reunite in Chicago '36 to pull off a gigantic con trick in order to "take" a paranoid racketeer (Robert Shaw). The adept sleight-of-hand of director George Roy Hill, the twists in the plot, and the beautifully staged con tricks, suck in the audience too!
Thursday 25 May 2.15 pm
A credit to the world, is how the government would have us believe New Zealand's multi-racial society works. And of course government departments lead the way in maintaining our harmonious society.
Mind you, such things shouldn't be taken too far. It would be entirely wrong if an absence of racism meant people couldn't have their little jokes. And what would happen if civil servants ever got the idea that they weren't above the expectations placed on the rest of society?
Just to show, perhaps, that nobody should take themselves too seriously, the in-house newsletter of the Justice department recently included a picture of an ape chewing on window bars and the following comments:
600 Black Power Mob members stayed in Napier over the Easter weekend. To avoid any confrontation during this time, some rival mobsters went into hiding:
"Them Black Power fellas won't be able to get me here" says a local Mongrel Mob Member as he chews thoughtfully on the protective window bars provided by the 'Justice Holiday Inns Corporation' at their resort complex on the hill overlooking Hawkes Bay.
Funny? Blatant racism we call it. What is worse, the government does not even seem upset. Minister of Justice David Thomson describes the article as a "joke". When Hart demanded a full inquiry into the matter he replied that he was not going to take any notice of "Silly suggestions from a silly organisation." This contemptible attitude from a contemptible government probably won't find much favour either.
The Victoria Debating Society has been invited, in accordance with long standing practice, to send two people on a debating tour of American universities during February and
Selection of the team will be done through a series of selection debates, during which the contestants will be awarded points. All Victoria students are eligible but they must first go through the minor formality of joining the Debating Society. For further information contact:
During April and May students on campuses throughout the country have been invited to participate in Photo-Art '78, a national exhibition with entry by way of competition.
The New Zealand Students' Arts Council is looking for ten on campus photographers' work to tour New Zealand in a national exhibition between
The aim of Photo-Art '78, is to promote the future of the amateur photographer and so enhance the art of photography in New Zealand.
The exhibition made up of the ten selected photographers, each represented by three to four images, will provoke public reaction and awareness of not only photographic art as a medium of expression in New Zealand, but such an art from in its development; as exemplified by the representative works of the presented artists.
The ten photographers will have their work published in 'Photo Forum', and Kodak NZ LTD are also right behind the Council in placing impetus for the competition on artistic ideals and recognition. Thus Photo-Art '78, as both a national exhibition and competition is rare in this day of ever increasing photographic work.
The New Zealand Students' Arts Council is an independent organisation representing the cultural needs of some 41,000 tertiary students all over New Zealand. Photo-Art '78 is organised in line with one of the Council's three aims, namely to promote the development of student cultural and artistic endeavours.
For further information:
Anyone, Like Thea, who believes that contraception is the answer to the problem of unwanted pregnacies isn't facing up to realities.
Every single method including abstinence, has its disadvantages and no method is contraceptively perfect. In terms of effectiveness the following punters' guide is given:
We appreciate that the gambling instinct is pretty strong, but there's enough risk in using the highly rated methods without resorting to those lower down the scale.
Take for example the safe period. One of the commonest gambles is the notion that it is safe for x days after the period, 'x' being any convenient number from 1—14. "Tonight" usually works out to be safe.
There are in fact good methods of calculating the fertile period but guesswork shouldn't be one of them. Having regular periods is always an asset and removes some of the gamble. If you can recognise the signs of ovulation that will readily lower your handicap. Not everyong knows that sperm can survive for up to 4 or 5 days. If you did that's a bonus point. Your chances can be improved by temperature taking and if you are seriously interested in the careful calculation of the fertile phase, come and find out more about it.
If you still prefer to gamble, remember that The Safest Time of the Cycle is Just before or During the Period - Not after. This is a fairly important fact of life.
Another good tip for partners is to know about the "morning-after" pill. If you have taken a risk or your usual method has let you down (like the condom broke or he didn't pull out in time) then you can be protected from a pregnancy if you get a prescription for high doses of oestrogen within 72 hours of the event.
This can cause nausea and nobody in their right mind advocates it except as an emergency or last ditch method. Inserting an I.U.D. within 72 hours is another way of preventing implantation. Both methods can be compared to locking the stable door just in time.
With the restrictions of the Contraception, Sterilisation and Abortion Act of last December there's now a lot more at stake — for women that is.
Student Health offers a comprehensive contraception service. Both nurses and doctors will discuss all methods from A to Z, abstinence to vasectomy.
(Note: The purpose of the series is to present a number of speakers, each prepared to deal in a provocative and informed way with an aspect of the chosen theme. For
Other speakers currently awaiting confirmation will deal with:
All lectures will be held in the foyer of the Memorial theatre, from 12—2 pm. on Fridays.
Letters must be typed, double spaced on one side of the paper, and should not run on and on boring everybody to death. They can be dropped into the letters box just inside the Salient door (middle floor of the Union Building, graveyard end), left at the Studass office, or sent c/o VUWSA, Private Beg, Wellington
It came to my attention in the speech given by Mr. Atashi that there were only 5 or 6 people involved with him in the pursuant discussion. Thus made it very hard for people like myself and Kiwis who attended the discussion to express our point of view. Also if one asked a question, Mr. Atashi did not answer it, but rearranged it to suit the answer he had prepared, which made this discussion into an emotional controversy which was not proceeding in any general direction. Even if he tried to answer a question, he was shouted down because of his abusive and evasive use of facts and figures, in a manner that was confusing to the audience.
How do we expect speakers like Mr. Atashi to speak in our university if we do not respect his rights as well as each others' rights? Even though Mr. Atashi and I have conflicting views about the Middle East situation, I found it better to refrain from asking any questions, as to give the average kiwi student a chance to get to know the problem a little better.
It was apparent that Mr. Atashi was intoxicated by the exuberance of his own verbosity.
It has come to my attention that there exists on campus, a group who parade under the banner of "FLD" and purport to follow in the traditions of the ancient and better left dead Druidic orders last prevalent many centuries ago.
These some what misguided individuals apparently don't realise the true nature of their supposed forebears or the severe risks they are taking, in envoking even in jest the powers of the occult which they obviously do not understand.
The original Druids were a bunch of de—praved sadists who had the delightful habit of performing human sacrifices which was not only antisocial and very messy, but totally unnecessary to the working of their rites.
Therefore ye who treat the occult forces lightly beware lest you incur a karmic debt of such magnitude that the rest of eternity will be required for absolution
(So how is the reader to decide, from those who to us do confide Their wisdom of occult and metaphysical Which is wise and which just trivial?
But as for Druids and their sacrifice Tis true they say, we pay the price when decadent political expediency Corrupt religious integrity
It happened to Jews, to Christians and Islam Are we all to be forever damned And seek to cure our devout fellow man With rational minds who would see them banned?
— typstr)
Your report of the meeting on NZUSA held on April 1st and 2nd last was certainly very interesting, but I do not believe it gave a fair account of why Otago moved no confidence in the President of NZUSA.
In this letter, it would be difficult for me to explain the reasons but I believe however that there are two major things that are presently wrong with NZUSA.
Firstly, the structure does not allow for students at the so called grass root level to become involved and identify with their National Association. The structure allows for much participation from constituent Presidents and National Officers, but does not encourage, or perhaps even permit, direct participation from grass roots students. Clearly the only exception is when students request to participate in a protest or demonstration which has already been pre-determined by a meeting of constituent Presidents in Wellington.
Secondly however taking whatever structure of NZUSA you prefer, and giving that structure whatever priorities you personally prefer. I do not believe that NZUSA can exist satisfactorily with a President who is incapable of coping with present problems.
You article seemed to indicate that I simply wanted to get rid of Lisa Sacksen. This I have certainly attempted, but I do not think the mistake should be made of believing that this was the only thing I wanted to do.
I belive that the structure of NZUSA must allow for direct participation from students, and must ensure that the gap between students and the hierarchy of NZUSA is narrowed so that students are more readily able to identify with their National Association remembering of course/that their main purpose for attending the University is certainly far removed from simply an ability to join a prestigeous, compentent, efficient and powerful National Students Association!
Taking a structure that allows for direct participation, NZUSA must always act efficiently. I believe that NZUSA will always be less than that whilst there are student leaders in Wellington incapable of coping with-current problems.
These are the reasons that I believe that the structure of NZUSA should be changed. These are the reasons why I moved no confidence in the President of NZUSA after the matter having been discussed at the Otago Executive, and the subsequent two Student Councils. Those bodies gave official backing to my beliefs and along with clear indication from not less than six forums here I felt I had Otago support, and that Otago were right, in attempting to reform the structure of NZUSA and change less than satisfactory personnel.
(How I wish this letter actually did help clarify Otago's position on NZUSA. But what are the arguments? Firstly you claim the structure does not allow for grass roots participation. What would you have, Andrew forced participation by all students at NZUSA meetings? As it stands any student has the perfect right to attend and speak at any meeting NZUSA holds, which is more than your association can claim.
You suggest that courses of action for NZUSA are decided by the constituent Presidents, and that students can do no more than go along with these decisions. Surely it is the responsibility of each constituent President to get a mandate from his/her campus if student participation in decision-making is to be increased. There is no way National Office can enforce this.
Your second point refers to the present "incapable" President. This is your opinion and you are entitled to it. However your reasons for holding this opinion, and your arguments as to why removing the present incumbent would be an effective way of solving NZUSA's problems have clearly not convinced any other constituent president. It is perhaps unfortunate that your letter does not give us any new insights to the you views.
Finally, you accuse me of bias in the whole affair. I would have suspected that such a claim would be substantiated more than you have been able to do. — Ed.)
I am writing in reply to Gary Herrington's letter which appeared in the May 15 issue of Salient. In particular I wish to address myself to his comments on the relationship between the Christian faith and common sense.
He wrote that "The Christians have been quite successful in persuading people to accept the view that their assertions should not be judged by the standards of ordinary common sense" and he went on to say that he had never understood why they (Christians) are so special.
Gary, you have misconceived the Christian position. God invites all men to "Come now and let us reason together". (Isaiah 1 v. 18). The Christian religion has always been open to rational examination and great volumes of theological debate have been recorded. By no means is the Christian message some sort of irrational faith for the intellectually weak.
However, on the other hand, it is quite clear that the man who wishes to grasp the full meaning of Christ and the Christian faith cannot do so with a purely intellectually understanding. The truth is not merely a rational proposition but a living and burning spiritual reality. Christ did not merely speak true words, he was (and is) the Truth. And the faith which the Bible talks about is not an intellectual conviction in the truth of Jesus' words, for as Paul writes "With the heart man believes" (Romans 10 v. 10). The intellect will not lead us to Christ, it can take us only part of the way.
So while it is necessary to have an open mind it is more important not to prejudge with your heart. And I think if you approach the Christian
P.S. You can contact me at 893560 if you are interested in really talking it out.
Reading last week's Salient, I came across a letter concerning the commonsense of Christianity. Now I am not at all a Christian, but although my Christian morals are incomplete, those I have are excellent, and so I am moved to defend a person attacked, even if it is an empty gesture. I mean, if faith is faith, as they say it is, even bad reasoning cannot touch it. I agree that the people often display a sentimentality that would make Isaiah writhe, but I cannot let fools berate fools for taking a good book to heart.
I know that I myself would rather be a good Kiwi than a bad Christian, yet I think that common sense is an inarticulate man's term for what we others would call mental foot-sloggery. True, it is always best to write easily verifiable sense in exams, marking-times being constricted nowadays but writers of those greater books took the best part of 1000 years to write those one thousand pages, since revelation comes at unexpected Ions-awaited moments. That is the difference between you and Isaiah.
I am glad to see the druids are coming-back again. I see they have attained a certain success, having their own little high-rise (I auspicious stories) on the corner or Woodward Street. The window area might be larger, yet I'm delighted
I was brought up to fear the tohunga, and would not wish to suffer the power of a makutu - but druids? Robert Graves pays you are men to fear, that in during training you must lie almost submerged in icy water, with a rock on your chest, for one night, and thus compose an epic poem and its tune. But I can't believe it.
Don't try to scare us with guff about controlling the weather; that rain was just a cold front from Antarctica way. All right, I admit it, who brought it here? Some power, I'll bet, but not a druid. You Druids are still Welsh in your hearts hearts, to control Southern Hemisphere weather, you have to perform all your old spells widder-shins, and as we all know, you won't do that.
So when you want rain you bring the sirocco and when you try to curse the summer and halt the solstices, you eclipsed the moon one night '(vertically too, and to see it emerge was beautiful) and brought us a decent summer. An inefficient evil is man's greatest delight. Good luck.
P.S. My first letter never came to its point directly but I did have a serious complaint. I see the TV is still burning away in the room on the top floor, and there's always an atmosphere of the most terrible abomination of cultural desolation there. It's bloody depressing, it reminds me of an old people's home I once had to visit, but the people there were dying anyway, and needed preparation for Purgatory.
I wish to protest in the strongest possible terms over the fawning and sycophantic letters appearing in your newspaper which adulate and acclaim aardvarks. Readers may not be aware that the aardvark is a native beast of South Africa. It is a most ugly creature with a long vacuum cleaner snout and a long thick tail. I suggest that its unprepossessing appearance and domicile in a country that practises unacceptable racial policies make it eminently unsuited to the kudos it has received in your columns.
I wonder whether your readers have ever considered the advantages of a wombat, (genus phas-colomys),? The wombat has an endearing stubby nose and a sensible rudimentary tail. It practices no particular racial policy and, unlike the aardvark, is a vegetarian. Although presently domiciled in South Australia, my organisation is trying to import the breed into New Zealand. To this end I shall be seeing Mr Ray La Varis M.P. on May 30th in the hope of arranging import licences on a commission basis, (to be paid in platypuses.)
If this fails, I will attempt to obtain visas for the wombats so that they may enter the country for a short visit. During this time marriages may be arranged for them so that they can stay in the country permanently. This scheme recently proved successful for an aardvark, Mr Francis Bart ho. Should any reader be interested in marrying a wombat, they should write to me, enclosing details of any blood relationship to the Prime Minister or a member of Cabinet.
Mr. G. Herrington is apparently a man of anguish. Last year, he was "indignant" for the cause of the Croatians. This year, he has yet found another excuse for his hobby horse — rationalism (and tergiversation).
I have to speak out for the unborn child, who is the weakest, the youngest, and the most unresisting party. I wish to subscribe to the divinely insitituted teaching office of the holy Catholic Church on the issue of Morality. I do good-will by calling upon my protestant friends to recant that "Bible-only" doctrine which is a human tradition from the 16th Century.
The Catholic Church does not consider medically-indicated or therapeutic abortions always wrong. She does reject the false ethical principle that the end justifies even morally evil means. On the other hand, she does not lean to excesses like the Jainist non-violence: if one cannot avoid a snake one must submit to being bitten by it rather than kill it.
It is refreshing to see someone taking life so seriously as Mr. Herrington. I wonder whether he ever attempts to write his inks into actions. Has he thought of lending a hand to Mother Teresa and Brother Andrew in the slums and streets of Calcutta with Jeane Viemey in his mercy work among the intellectually handicaps, Doris Day in her stand with the "under privilieged "? What about the trial of the late Fr Damien in his leprosy mission, or even Fr Owen (the last Catholic Chaplain at VUW with whom Mr. Herrington had a "love-and-hate" affair) in his "chaste, poverty and obedience" apostolate in hazardous Zambia?
It is the "Saints" who give witness to the uniqueness of Christianity. These people (doing ordinary things extraordinarily well) give totally of themselves for the sake of humanity, without seeking glorification or even understanding. They are cheerful givers, and peculiarly, they claim that God is their strength and power. The Christians (Saints, in the custom of Paul) are about the Father's business (Jn 5:17) and God's fellow workers (1 Cor 3:9);
I am appalled at the standard of behaviour in this hallowed place of learning. It is all due to the left wing and socialist/communist influence on campus. Fascism is decried and yet only when it prevails can there be law and order prevailing within our society.
Only when men of high calibre thinking — non communists — run the country and we all rally around the Queen — God bless her name — can we pull through the current communist inspired depression by instilling in the population a sense of national pride and unity where the strong can make the country a safe and healthy place to live in once more. We shall then be rid of the need to demonstrate and other socialist inspired plots will be uncovered.
Law and order in these difficult days must be maintained and so the army should be able to help the police more. After all, when we are dealing with communists and other subversives the rules of our land must be obeyed and anyone who doesn't should not be allowed here.
God Save the Queen
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Strangely enough, in his reply to the reply Mr Gary Herrington makes a concession: he says, "the Christians have been quite successful in persuading people to accept the view...". Now why could this be? Surely there must be something in Christianity then.
As for "scrapping" the Christian clubs and the Chaplaincy - Mr Herrington has no more right to do that than one would have to scrap a Bigot's Club, were he to form one.
Near the end of last year I promised the four tutorials I was taking in Political Science (Liberal Democratic Theory) that they would eventually be given an account of mine on the course. Well, I did not complete it, but handed in a skeleton of it to several members of the Pols Department, as well as earning my honours degree with it It is in two sections — (1) the idea of POLIS (2) ?. (2) almost impossible to read, but preferably after (1). It any of my students are game to follow up some of our tangled headaches of last year, then they might get hold of these 'essays'. You will not understand them.
I write to deplore Salient's spinelessness in deliberately refusing to provide students with information on the Pythagoras Owl issue. This is an affair of some importance involving a denial by a certain member of the academic staff of the English Dept. of this valuable creature's very right to exist.
I need hardly impress upon you the awesome ethical ramifications of this whole question. As a direct threat to civil liberties the recently enacted SIS legislation is its only parallel. Since the issue's original flare-up two weeks ago in Tutorial Room T303, the evil machinations of National censorship have been probed to their depths.
And You, editor of a student newspaper with a distinguished history of social conscience and struggle against oppression have been content on this occasion to just "go along with the rest of them". Could it be that this issue is too hot for even Salient to handle?
Come out of the woodwork, Wilson. Students want to know where you stand. You can't turn a blind eye to the Pythagoras Owl.
(I agree, this is an important story, but right now we are following the policy of a nod being as good as a wink to a blind bat — Ed.)
Re: Squid Pro Quo. Salient May 15
Regarding S. Thorpe's assertion that "Russia is far from being the worst fishing nation. It has a record of efficiency, cooperation and concern for observing the local regulations," I must take grave exception.
I have no knowledge of the New Zealand experience with the Russian fleets but I can tell you that the outrageous behaviour of Russian fishermen in Canadian waters has led to Russian fishermen being denied port facilities in Canada, and has forced Canadian fishermen to arm their boats in order to dissuade Russian trawlers from slashing their nets, and otherwise trying to terrorize them out of the rich fishing grounds of the Canadian Grand Banks.
This was before the declaration of the 200 mile territorial limit, at a time when everything beyond 12 miles was 'international waters'. The navy repeatedly tried to protect the fishing fleets but the four destroyers and two submarines assigned to East Coast patrol could not be everywhere at once. On one occasion the Russians were actually filmed cutting the trawl lines of a Canadian boat and at that point the government denied them port facilities.
As usual, the Russians showed that the only rules they obey are those of force. Once the government took a hard line with them, they decided to be gentlemen, but until that point seemed interested in doing only what was to their own advantage, rules be damned.
It requires no ideological disagreement with the Russian political system to observe that in international relations, Mother Russia does exactly as she pleases until forcibly stopped by sanctions or threatened military action. This can indeed be called "efficient cooperation" as S. Thorpe asserts, but it carries connotations not normally associated with the word 'cooperation'.
I would be grateful if your correspondant, Gary Herrington, could explain exactly what he means with his statement 'generally speaking any society which through misguided liberalism allows religious organisations to operate legally is asking for trouble'. This sounds remarkably like a religious zealot speaking.