(i) Marxist Knowledge

In a letter published in "Salient" on September 19, Peter Wilson states that the Marxist theory of knowledge "asserts that things can only be known in the degree to which they are changed or altered," a statement which invoked in me some unease.

Peter quotes by way of example: "To know the taste of a pear one must change the pear by biting it." But I ask him whether it is necessary to change the pear in order to know its colour, or even its smell?

I have found that the dilemma is well resolved by Mao Tsetung ("Four Essays on Philosophy", p 134, the essay "Where do correct ideas come from?") Knowledge has essentially two aspects: perceptual, that is the information or knowledge accummulated by observation of the real world by means of our five sense organs, and conceptual, or theoretical knowledge.

"The leap to conceptual knowledge, i.e., to ideas, occurs when sufficient perceptual knowledge is accumulated." But we cannot yet say that the idea is correct. It must be tested in practice, i.e., that conceptual knowledge must be compared with a new selection of perceptual knowledge.

"Often a correct idea can be arrived at only after many repetitions of the process leading from matter to consciousness and then back to matter. Such is the Marxist theory of knowledge." (p 135)

The next sentence seems singularly appropriate: "Among our comrades there are many who do not yet understand this theory of knowledge. When asked the source of their ideas, opinions, policies, methods, plans and conclusions, eloquent speeches and long articles, they consider the question strange and cannot answer it."

I present this to you as a fraternal criticism, in the hope that it will aid in the process of understanding and transforming this present society.

(ii) Menstrual Extraction

This is my last word on the subject of the Lorraine Rothman visit. It seems that Comrade Wilson and I must agree to differ as his priorities are different from mine. I am concerned with what women want whereas he is concerned with tactics and strategy. To me all this talk about strategy is alien to my ideas of socialism. Woman want to find out about selfhelp centres and this has been proved by the tremendous response shown to the tour. I found her work both interesting and exciting as for too long women's needs in the field of health and welfare have been disregarded as trivial or the result of neurosis. Lorraine Rothman throughout her tour emphasised the need for doctors and qualified personnel and categorically stated that the menstrual extractor is not an abortion causing device. Finally I would like to thank o all those sisters who wrote in expressing similar views to mine. Most so-called revolutionaries would do well to heed the desires of their women comrades as they will need them when the revolution comes more than they'll need perfect tactics or strategies.

(iii) Omega

On the basis of the cliche "A picture is worth a thousand words" I enclose a "letter" on the subject of Israeli militarism which I feel is worth a few hundred, at least.

My second letter is of more conventional form and was provoked by the item "Omega Story Corrections" of the October 3 edition. I read the letter of B. Jones and, as you imply, his claims are not wholly true.

In the highly reputable McGraw-Hill publication, "Electronics", a periodical concerned with the US electronics industry, the December 1967 edition, in the section "Washington Newsletter" is an article headed—"Pentagon Anchors Navy's Omega". The entire article reads as follows:—

"Navy officials seeking the Pentagon's go ahead for full-scale deployment of the Omega navigation system got the answer they were afraid of getting: approval, but no funding to implement it. As expected (Electronics, Oct. 16, p 69), the Defence Department's reasons were based on the crackdown on non-Vietnam military spending. And the Navy is pessimistic about getting any funds in the fiscal 1969 budget to turn its limited research and development system into an operation worldwide navigation network.

"The Pentagon told the Navy it could give Omega's four present transmitters "operational status"—whatever that means. As one Navy project officer put it: "Your guess is as good as mine". They very low-frequency transmitters, though officially listed as R & D installations, actually have been operational for more than a year.

"Had the Pentagon gone along with full-scale deployment, the Navy planned to double the power of the transmitters and add other equipment at these four sites. It also would have built four more transmitters. The way things stand now, the Navy says it would welcome an offer by any other nation to build the transmitters."

I submit that this article clearly and authoritatively shows that Omega is military.

I make one further quotation from the same publication, though I am unable to judge its significance.

"Registered US Patent Office; copyright 1867 by McGraw-Hill Inc. All rights reserved, including the right to reproduce the contents of this publication in whole or in part."