The Morning After But Not Regularly

It's never loo late to correct a mistake! And I would like to correct a printing error towards the end of the article in Salient April 11 th Pg.9 on "The Morning After Pill".

It is pretty effective as an emergency method only but it should never be thought of as a once-a-month method, at least in its present form.

Yours sincerely, Margaret Sparrow

[We regret that this mistake escaped our notice. The article should have read:

Why Shouldn't It Be Used as a Oncea-Month Method? Because there are better and safer methods available which have less side effects.

What Do You Mean Safer? Doesnt It Always Work? It's pretty effective. In the medical literature there are now over 5,000 cases and virtually no pregnancies as long as treatment has been given early enough and in high enough dosage.]

Abolish the Student

Your editorial hinted at the real fault with this university - the students. Indeed it is they who are the university's weakness. For the most part the so-called students are merely apprentices for status. If they were genuine scholars/ genuine students they just would not put up with the sloppy teaching, the crazy divisions of academic propriety and the mixing of learning with competition for social approval.

How can we rectify this? The obvious answer is to abolish the student (in his current form). This could be done by not awarding any more degrees. Enrolments next year would be down about ninety per cent. All that would remain would be a few people who just want to know, sitting at the feel of a small group of philosophers. (Which is exactly what we need and haven't got now). I for one, want to know. When I say such things some of my fellow students say "Yeah, but I've got so many essays to write I never have time to read anything". Others just look sick.

With respect, it would be better if this great institution did not exist. I absorb so much creative energy. Without it new things could grow.

P.R.H. Jackman.

Crew Cut Singaporean Hits Back

I find Charlie Chan's statements outrageous, biased and aimed at stirring unpleasant sentiments amongst Singaporeans and Malaysians.

As the majority in the university Malaysians obviously have a better representation in the MSSA. and probably dominate it. As Singaporeans and Malaysians are students in the country shouldn't they forget their political differences and have an association where attitudes and views could be exchanged and activities. Being of very similar cultural and ethnic background, having two associations representing them can only result in unpleasant rivalries and duplication of activities which is inevitably wasteful. Perhaps I should remind Mr Chan that Singaporeans have been minding their affairs exceptionally well since their separation from Malaysia, and so his claim that Singaporeans are prasites is utterly baseless.

As to Mr Chan's statement that we are dividing Malaysians into two associations I can only say that the continued struggle between the two associations is due to the conflicts between their leaders. Both are equally ambitious and unwilling to compromise for fear of having to forsake their posts, and it is unfortunate that Singaporeans should be made the scapegoat. Furthermore Mr Chan's jibe about our crew cuts illustrates the mentality of people of his type. Mr Chan does not have to wear a crew cut, but it might go a long way towards eradicating that sort of childish mentality if he would care to rid his head of some dead cells.

S.H. Lee 'Crew cut Singaporean'

Sarban Singh Remembers

I like to take this opportunity in thanking all my friends. University staff and fellow colleagues in giving me a fabulous time while I was a student. I cherish all memories dearly.

I will be very pleased if all my friends will write to me or personally call me when they are in this part of the world: My address is as follows:

Open Letter to the "Gutless Malaysian Student".

In your letter to Salient dated 14 March 1973 (Vol. 36 No, 3), there were many accusations laid against mc. May I take this opportunity to reply to your accusations and to point out the faults, fallacies, and contradictions in your letter.

Your first fault is that you put too much trust in your trolling mate, Peter Rotherham's 'open letter'. Perhaps you are a TAB fan and could not venture beyond the perimeters of Hun Park to Find out for yourself, the many misleading accusations and statements in Rotherham's open letter.

I admit I did grab and push Rotherham. But I did not thrust my hands under his nose, for to do so would have required 'all the perfumes of Arabia' to clean my hands again. Peter Rotherham is nearly twice my size. If he had any guts, he would have retaliated, instead of playing 'Penguin'.

In the open letter Penguin Rotherham stated that there were no demonstrations planned on Sharpeville Day, implying there were no activities planned at all! How misleading! On Sharpeville Day, the activities organized by the National Anti-Apartheid Co-ordinating Committee were successful, whereas Rotherham's "mass demonstration" crapped out badly, proving my point that 'trotting down the streets was indeed a waste of time.

Rotherham also claimed the mass demonstration was endorsed by, many 'Trade Unionist, Labour leaders, and student leaders'. However he conveniently forgot to mention how he deceived them into endorsing the demonstration. When the cat was let out of the bag again, most of the people who initially endorsed The demonstration withdrew their support. Deceiving and misleading people is nothing new to Penguin Rotherham and his associates, the SAL. It had happened many times before and would occur again. So much for your Hutt Park heroes.

In your letter, you accused me of being 'a pain in the neck on campus'. Perhaps you are right. 1 am indeed a pain in the neck on campus to you and your kind; to the right wing, the fascist and racist on campus; to the University Administration; to your so called democratic mates in Kuala Lumpur; and your trotting mates of Mount Leon. But I am certainly not a pain in the neck to the progressive elements, the left, and those students who put their time, energy and effort into the Students' Association and other progressive organisations.

I am a liability rather than an asset to the cause of Hart, you claimed. The amount of time and energy I put into the cause of Hart is more than the amount of 'rice and lies' you have swallowed. Perhaps if you had cared to venture out of the 4-walls of your Ivory Tower and the perimeters of Hutt Park, you might have vomited out some of the lies and might not have accused me of being a pain in the neck on campus and a liability to the cause of Hart.

Finally, your accusation that to me 'the democratic rights of other students are not important', shows the true colours of your hypocrisy. If you sincerely believe in the principle of "democratic rights of others', you should at least be consistent enough to champion the democratic rights of your own fellow countrymen — your countrymen who happen to hold different views from the facist dictatorial Malaysian government and are now rolling in prison camps dotted all over the country; and your fellow overseas Malaysian students whom upon arrival home, had their passports confiscated, their freedom of association denied and movement restricted, because they had enough guts and convictions to stand up against the injustices of the Malaysian government. Instead you not only prefer but choose to don a "white mask" over your gutless face and throw smearing paints at others, who have the courage of their conviction to stand up and be Counted.

People like your kind not only give me a pain in my neck, but also a pain in my guts as well.

H.T. Lee Australia

Baby-in-a-Bucket

It seems that the abortion issue can be reduced to a basic conflict concerning the rights of the foetus. The pro-abortionists claim that the foetus has no rights or at least fewer than those of the woman who bears it, and their claim to legal abortion for those who desire it is thereby consistant. The anti-abortionists, claiming that the foetus has rights as a human being, are at best inconsistent in granting those rights in a manner which denies the woman her rights. (Which I assume they respect). So it would seem that the anti-abortionists are in the shit, not knowing who deserves what. How then, can the necessarily conscious-stricken beasties ease their burden? Their primary objective should be to nip the problem in the buds by pushing world-wide anti-conception.

For the anti-abortionist, whether a woman has an abortion or not should make tittle difference since either way one party gets a raw deal. Hence, to blow the benevolent brain, why not solve the woman's problem and give the wee nipper a chance too? Make abortion legal and accessible and work towards providing an alternative life support system for the wee dit (thus keeping the pro-abortionists happy too). So here it is folks, you grab the out-going blob, toss it straight into a bucket to be left there for the regulation 9 months, then whit it out, dry it, spank it and air-freight it direct to an adoptive morally relaxed, ex-1973 anti-abortion campaigner for loving care and attention. J. Christ almighty etc. wot am I doing, a student, borthering about all this? Back to the fourth floor (Dy—Z) I scurry to peer through dirty windows V stuff.

Peter Hallwright.

Parking Policy

I have a complaint. It may seem a dumb one but what with exams and all that shit approaching, complaining and raving on is my safety valve.

Now, let's get down to it! Who is the fuck-wit who came to varsity by boat?Why is the "Reo Moana II" berthed outside the Hunter Building?Why do I get threats, abuse and warnings when I park my car in front of Hunter?

Those fucking pricks scream about a lack of parking space so fuck off you students but make way for my, boat!

O.K. So maybe he/she/it got permission to berth his boat there. Fine; pass the bloody buck. So who's the fucked-up no-wit who gave him permission?

You bastards! Get off your fat arses and move that pharking boat because this is one complaint that I've got a solution for.

Papa Reo Moana

The Agony of Queueing for Garbage

Milton once said 'they also serve who only stand and wait', I respectfully submit with great deference to Milton, he is a lambent fool . . . If he had ever had to stand in tiresome line, in the tiresome queue in the tiresome 2nd floor university dining room this line would never have entered his bloody head.

The university dining facilities are abnormal which is merely a self-evident Truth, indicative of the organisation behind them. One waitress is a sonambulist, another is the waking equivalent, and the food is the jaundiced anaemic culinary equivalent of the drab decor. I would seriously suggest to the aberrant wit who expects us to take our dishes back (to cut costs) that he gets his own mental dishes mentally washed and mentally stacked in his cracked crockery cerebrum, and then, yes and then, has one of his own meals and convulsively suffers as our alimentary canals are forced to.

Peter T. Murphy

Trotsky's Treachery

Hector MacNeill's letter concerning Graham Rua's article on Kronstadt completely falsifies several points. Mr MacNeill speaks of Makhno's "atrocities against jews". Yet Makhno frequently expressed his opposition to any form of ethnic or national discrimination. Makhno himself shot a fellow revolutionary who had written "Defend the Revolution! Long Live Makhno! Down with the Jews"! Sure Makhno was responsible for the death of some Jews, but they were wealthy bourgeois. Makhno wrote that while the rich Jews would naturally side against die Anarchists, die poorer Jews were the friends and comrades of the peasants.

Mr MacNeill further distorts the truth when he speaks of the lack of support of workers and peasants for Makhno. Makhno's main commanders comprised eleven peasants and two workers (Voline's figures). It was Lenin who made the sneering remark: ". . . the peasants are infected with anarchism", and continued to say that the "mere peasant" enthusiasm would seon bum itself out. Makhno had the solid support of the peasants who were strongly anti-Soviet and anti-Devikin (a leading counter-revolutionary general).

As for Trotsky, he was indeed responsible as Minister of War, for the repression of the sailors and peasants in Kronstadt and the Ukraine. True he made peace with them for a while, yet this was due to his recognition of their capabilities as powerful fighters and great tacticians. Once he had used them, he turned on them like a traitor, to impose the communist state and all its authoritarianism upon the people. On March 4, 1921 there appeared an official manifesto signed by Lenin and Trotsky declaring Kronstadt guilty of meeting and ordering Kronstadt to be suppressed. On March 5 Trotsky issued an ultimatum. And on March 7 Kronstadt was attacked, signifying the death of freedom in Russia.

If people wish to get the true story of Kronstadt, told by one who was there, they would be best advised to read The Bolshevik Myth and The Kronstadt Rebellion both by Alexander Berkman, and not to write to Hector MacNeill for his warped trash.

Yours Geoff Adlam

Official Reply

In reply to the letter criticising the Counselling Service (Salient, April 11), I have several comments to make.

There is a staff of three in the Counselling Service, and they are the only people who have access to the Counselling Service files. The University Administration, the Labour Department and the Security Service do not have access to them. If they requested information, they would be refused.

It is Mr I. H. Boyd, Director of Welfare Services, who assists overseas students, if they wish to have assistance, with student permits or other matters involving the Labour Department. When overseas students approach the Counselling Service for help in these matters they are referred to Mr Boyd, but he does not have access to Counselling Service files. If an overseas student especially asks a Counsellor to help him in matters relating to the Labour Department, then it is the Counsellor who helps. On a few occasions Mr Boyd has been absent from the University and the Counsellors have stood in his place for overseas students who have needed emergency help.

Any student who wishes to have his file destroyed has only to ask. Lee Foundation applications from past years have been destroyed.

Ruth Swatland, Head of Counselling Service

Reviewer not "With If"

I am amazed that your record reviewer, Mr P.F. O'Dea is so "with it" that he does not know that the Stone The Crows album is titled Ontinuous Performance and that the English sleeve was in fact a single cover like the New Zealand version, not a "fold out".

Constructively critical record reviews are welcomed but Mr O'Dea's ignorance of die facts sometimes makes his reviews "ham fisted", which fools no one, except perhaps Mr O'Dea himself.

Referring to the review of Loggins &- Messina, I would advise your readers that whilst Mr O'Dea may personally prefer New Riders Of The Purple Sage to Loggins & Messina (and that indeed is my own personal preference), the record buying public of New Zealand have shown a marked preference for Loggins & Messina (in line with a wordwide trend).

We at Phonogram feel both groups are musically excellent and deserving of the high praise received from record reviews both here and overseas (all of whom I am sure would know that the Stone The Crows album is titled Ontisuovs Performance).

Letter from Cat Poisoner

How refreshing it is to come across a letter in your paper which is written by a real human being, rather than by a Socialist, Abortionist, Catholic, Malaysian. Christian, Liberationist or other egotistical bigot (e.g. Don Franks). I refer of course, to that gem of sarcasm and wit by Diane Hopper in reply to the account of my traumatic experience with an exploding can of pet food. Of course I worry about walls more than cats; after all, what use is a nine-year old paranoid ginger torn with no teeth, no balls and the most pathetic of miaows compared to a liquid-lightning sparkling clean kitchen wall (shines so brightly you can sec yourself in it).

I would also suggest, dear Diane, that whatever kind of meat I choose to feed to Oedipus, it would be 80% moisture whether it was beef, fish or human (see directions on can).

One further comment:- it is dangerous to make sweeping generalizations about students' values from the contents of a single letter by a single student (for Christ's sake). In fact, as a wall-loving cat hater, I am probably unique.

Yours with a loving kiss, The Phantom Chunderer.

No Secrets

I was interested in reading the letter to Salient last week about the secrecy or otherwise of the Student Counselling Service. I would like to add to this an account of the case of a friend of mine, a bloke who went to see the counselling service in 1970 after finals when he was feeling a bit down, wasn't sure about his papers - having rows with his old man etc. He saw Miss Swatland for about four weeks and eventually packed it in as things had got better and he thought that he wasn't getting that much out of the counselling.

He had no more problems - finished his degree Ok the next year and at the beginning of this year applied for a job with the university. He gave the Student Health as a medical reference and it is presumably through this that the university found out that he had been to the counselling service.

What happened then we don't know but the end result was that Miss Swatland prepared a report on this person for the university authorities saying how long the person had been seeing her and detailing his personal pro blems and disturbances.

So friends if you are ever going to apply for a job with the university don't go within spitting distance of the Student Counselling Service cos they will sell you down the line every time.

You Know Who.

Counselling Rebels

In reply to the letter regarding the counselling service signed by 'A Group of Rebels', who are apparently so ardently rebellious that they find it preferable not to identify themselves by name, I should like to say that while as they suspect the Student Counselling Service may well be playing an important role in supplying information about students to the Labour Department' their spirit of rebellion evidently does not extend to the simple act of first inquiring of the counsellors as to whether or not such events do in fact occur. Neither, it would appear, have they bothered to find out answers to their further questions such as whether or not a personal file of a student will be destroyed on request, or regarding the nature of the power relation of the counselling service to the University authorities.

The paragraph regarding the petty stories of the academic staff sounds itself more like petty backyard gossip than a statement made on the grounds of evidence, and it seems most unusual and contradictory to say the least that those who would choose to see this service as one with aims of diverting 'the rebellious tendency of the students against the establishment', should regard staff members of this university as being in need of protection. Judging from Neil Wright's article on academics in this year's handbook they are not really grossly suffering at the hands of anyone let alone at those of the counselling service.

There is little doubt that many social work services, and the counselling service is a social work service, do function as 'tools' of the so-called 'establishment' and many of these services should be investigated and questioned. The counselling service, however, is hardly as guilty of performing such a role as are the social work and welfare services offered by such organizations as the Department of Social Welfare, of Justice, of State Advances, of Health etc.

The 'Rebels' letter further suffers from a confusion as to just when overseas students and their specific problems are being referred to and when all students are included in the remarks made. While conceding, then, that there is, in all probability, a case to be made in the interests of overseas students, as regards the rest of the student body in general, no-one is 'forced' to place themselves under the 'power and influence' of the counselling service. Unlike many people in New Zealand who come into contact with social work counsellors, students have both a choice in, and an awareness of, what they are doing when they ask to see a counsellor and they are free to leave an interview and reject the services as they please. Many of 'A Group of Rebels' fellows living in this country are refused both this valuable freedom of choice and the awareness of the functions of the social work process in relation to the power structure in our society.

These self-described 'rebels', therefore, would have a more effective case if they had first investigated the activities of the counselling service before presenting their garbled complaints, and further if they would cast their myopic pseudo-radical eyes in the direction of those people whose 'anger' really is being 'checked' and whose 'unrest' realty is being 'calmed', people to whom a university is a foreign country and students aliens, but people whose money is being used to enable such 'rebels' to be in a position to write such ill-constructed and inadequately substantiated accusations.

Wendy Mence

Neutral Reply?

K.S. Allan, is not a wanker — he's intelligent, truthful, thoughtful, educated, bases his arguments on solid facts and is good in bed.

Yours, Debbie

"Young Socialist" Smitten by Stalinist Smears

In your letters column in your April 11 issue a Mr Bonante cited the fact that a Socialist Unity Party spokesperson had called me an 'ultraleftist', and at a Hart meeting on the same evening Mike Law (National Deputy Chairman of Hart) had described me as 'a right wing agent'. Mr Bonante seemed rather puzzled by all this, and asked that die 'confusion' be cleared up. As the person most directly concerned, I will attempt to do just that.

The first charge (that I am an ultraleftist) was made in relation to the Trotskyist movement's condemnation of the Russian invasion of Hungary (1956). Czechoslovakia (1968), and the general repression of dissent within the Eastern European workers states. The charge was made by the Sup spokesperson in an attempt at discrediting this position, and 'justifying' his own party's slavish support for all the twists and tums in Soviet Union policy.

In attempting to hang the ultraleftism label on me, the Sup spokesperson simply demonstrated his party's complete lack of understanding of what this term really means. In line with everything else the Stalinists do, this spokesperson used a term which has a precise meaning in revolutionary theory, and twisted that meaning in order to justify his party' — bankrupt political positions. This simply follows from the Stalinist movement's long history of 'justifying' their sell outs, reformism, etc. The Stalinists are experts at rallying support for their bankruptcy from the revolutionary theory of Marx, Engels, and Lenin - through artificially injecting new meanings into the terms these men used, tearing quotations out of context, and so on.

The second charge (that I am 'a right wing agent') was made by Law when I was excluded from a Hart meeting on April 4. It is nothing more than a vicious smear. Law is fond of employing this kind of contemptible tactic and, like all those who use it, attempts to win his political point by hurling out absurd and unfounded abuse. Notice that he makes no attempt at proving his assertion (which he knows is a lie); he simply 'lays the charge', in a crude attempt at discrediting the political positions I support.

It is worth noting that this kind of smear has its origins in the Stalinist movement. Back in the 1920s and 1930s the Stalinists unsuccessfully tried to smear the Trotskyist movement through the use of expressions like 'agents of the Mikado", 'agents of Hitler', 'agent provocateur', etc. A more recent one is 'agents of the CIA'. Law therefore has the honour of helping to continue this noble 'tradition'. He has picked up on this disgusting smear tactic, and appears to be under the illusion that the use of it helps to bolster his 'radical' image.

In short, I am neither an ultraleftist, nor a right wing agent. "The Young Socialists, the political positions of which I support, is also neither of these two things. I trust therefore that Mr Bonante's 'confusion' can at last be laid lo rest.

A Friend In Need

A friend indeed, "Goldfinger"

Letter to a Yippie

You're totally fucked. Yippie! What are you — a movement or a myth? In your own language, any movement is "bad" — yet you say "publicity is the lifeblood of the movement". What movement? Yippie movement! That's? damn good synonym for a "group spreading the myth of revolution" at far as I'm [unclear: copoerned].

I'll start again, dive. Yippie! What are you — a publicity freak or a jetsetting teenager? Or a means to a "bloody important end?" Whose? Mine? Fuck off! Get back on your jet, you publicity freak, and write home! See you in next week's Salient.

Love from Dave.