Army officer gets his

Let me get directly to the point without wasting words on the absurdity in 'Lt. Lon Nol Thieu's argument.

Anti-Jack Boot League

Booze and Abortion.

Belatedly I wish to reply to two criticisms of my ideas in Salient June 20.

John Grainer again brings up my 'if you're not for the PRG you're against them idea. He describes this as 'idiocy and 'certainly not a rational argument'. Trying to make things clearer (and lay the debate down) let us consider the following situation.

John and a mate (say Bill) are in the Royal Tiger, quietly minding their own business. Another bloke (say Trev) appears and helps himself to Bills jug. Upon telling Trev to piss off, Bill has the remainder of the jug poured over him and then gets beaten about. If John doesn't go to his mates aid here he is in effect saying to Trev "You are perfectly entitled to bash around my friend — go ahead, I won't stop you". If he takes this attitude, John may well find Bill turning rather bitter towards him. I suggest that this is very similar to the Vietnam situation — if you do not support the PRG you are entitling the Americans to smash them around.

In reply to G.S. Little, I would find his/her condemnation more compelling if he/she had bothered to read my article (May 29) more carefully. One major point there was that the Remuera clinic 'has not been shown to have broken any law'. The major part of G. S. Little's letter rests on the presumption that it has and is continuing to do so. Is there any evidence for this?

Another point stems from G. S. Little's 'If the purpose of society is to provide support to and acceptance of each of its members. . .' Society at the moment does not have this as its highest goal but the making of profits for a small and increasingly foreign elite. If G. S. Little is interested in a more humane and just society, I suggest his/her energies would be better spent in struggling for socialism rather than supporting Dr Wall's repression.

Anthony Ward.

Resign!

I fully agree with "ex-MSA member" that MSA exec members should resign, as they have proved to be totally ineffective in representing the views of Malaysian members (not the whole Malaysian community as they pretend to). But would they? After all this would be a serious loss of face for them. Maybe they could resign one by one over a period of time so that it is not so noticeable.

Whenever they are attacked, they defend themselves by saying that they have organised games and dances etc. No one disagrees with this. But in view of the situation at home where many of our countrymen have suffered from government repression, when many of them are suffering from hunger and malnutrition, how can we go on enjoying ourselves dancing and indulging in our personal comfort without pangs of conscience?

Again at the end of August they are holding a Malaysia Day dance to rejoice over an illusory freedom called independence while our rulers progressively sell our country to foreigners. Those who are going to this dance must ask themselves whether they should instead give their ball ticket money to the squatters and landless people at home? At worse, they should boycott this function.

Red Malay

Dirty laundry and faded flowers

I view with a thrill of excitement the developments in the Middle-East today, anticipating at any moment the call to arms that every young man waits for. Have you ever reflected on the fact that, despite the horrors of war, it is at least a big thing? I mean to say that in it one is brought face to face with realities. The follies, selfishness, luxury and general pettiness of the vile commercial sort of existence led by nine-tenths of the people of the world in peacetime are replaced in war by a savagery that is at least more honest and outspoken. Look at it this way: in peacetime one just lives one's own little life, engaged in trivialities, worrying about one's own comfort, about money matters and all that sort of thing — just living for one's own self. What a sordid life it is! In war, on the other hand, even if you do get killed you only anticipate the inevitable by a few years in any case, and you have the satisfaction of knowing that you have "pegged out" in the attempt to help your country. You have, in fact, realised an ideal, which, as far as I can see, you very rarely do in ordinary life. The reason is that ordinary life runs on a commercial and selfish basis; if you want to "get on", as the saying is, you can't keep your hands clean.

Personally, I feel that war gives to everyone a chance to "get out of himself, to feel the exhileration and excitement that can only be surpassed by the few minutes before the start of a big school match. It gives everyone a sense of purpose, of belonging, even if only for a few weeks or days How proud our heroes must feel on their day, Anzac day when every [unclear: worthwhile] person remembers them (how many people who just' got on' in life are remembered like this?). Soon we too may be able to say — "I was there" or our friends and dear relatives can say 'he gave his life for his country — the ultimate unselfish sacrifice" — how our hearts will swell with pride.

P. McDonald

Revolution from an armchair.

If we ignore 'Lt Lon Nol Thieu's inane cynicism, there is a very serious question posed by him: are we arm-chair revolutionaries? Of course he was meaning that we were all the time. But are we? Do we sit around discussing theory without any ideas on how to put it into effect?

'Revolution' in its proper meaning is 'sudden or radical change'. The cynic took it for granted that this sudden, or radical, change is to be one transforming society into a socialist and eventually a communistic one, as is happening in China and Vietnam now. To change society, the individuals composing it must as a majority have socialist ideas, and a strong desire to change from the present capitalist system into a socialist one. History has shown us that this must be preceded by the violent overthrow of the capitalist class which is the main obstacle to such change. At present none of us is engaged in armed struggle to eliminate the capitalist class, at least in New Zealand. Why? This takes us to an examination of the society we live in, its ideals and aims and the problem of first changing people's thoughts. To this extent some of us are arm-chair revolutionaries, people who are learning and looking for ways of bringing our ideals into reality. A few are actually attempting to create revolution by working with the workers to promote awareness of their role in society. Even this has not come about without a change in our inner selves. It is therefore not too bad to be called 'arm chair revolutionaries' if we always remember that we should at the same time communicate with others what we want.

The best advice for Malaysians came from one of their countrymen, J.D. Silva, who said some time ago that it is a waste of time to talk about revolution (in criticism of arm-chair revolutionaries) if it stops there. The best thing for Malaysians to do, according to him, is to go home and work for this desirable change of society. In spite of his rabid fear and hatred of this change, Jack did indeed do the progressive movement of Malaysian students the greatest service with his advice and activities here. Perhaps Lt Thieu should take heed of this. 3000 Malaysians will not apply to stay here when that change comes, although many like Thieu would.

Oh Dear!

Some of your correspondents last week attacked the credibility of MSA leadership. If we look back at the past history of the personalities who have been presidents of the body many of us would be very surprised with the stand of at least one person namely Steven Oh who was president in 1973.

1973 was the year of the Malaysian cultural revolution in NZ., where the role of culture was seriously questioned: whether a people (the Chinese) should be denied their culture. More importantly whether culture should serve the people. In their attempt to answer this question the Otago Chinese Language club was vilified by the unlamented and departed Jack de Silva, as being 'subversive' ad nauseam. During the furore in the ensuing months, people gained popularity by coming our to defend the democratic rights of Malaysians. Not the least was the redoubtable Steven Oh.

Mr Oh (like Napoleon) rode to power in the MSA on the crest of popular dissent against Malaysian Fascism by championing the cause of democratic minded Malaysians. He took a firm stand against Jack de Silva's intimidation. He actively, and at the time what seems to be courageously, opposed ail Government threats of 'communists' and 'subversive' brandings. Salient Vol 36, No 23 Sept. 1973, reported his performance at the annual MSA elections and printed a letter by him opposing the High Commission. In his private conversations with MSA members and friends he stated unambiguously his belief in Democracy, and his determination to stand up against any attempt to dany this to Malaysians. He went so far as to encourage Malaysians to demonstrate outside the High Commission Student Office to protest against the inactivity of the Student Officer and the shabby window display along Wakefield St (opposite the Town Hall), This was all part of a demonstration of strong and decisive leadership on his part. He was very popular then.

Two years later, he was elected president again by a majority of one vote (a miracle by God!). What has happened since those halcyon days? Since then there appears to have been a change in approach or maybe principles. It seems to be alright when one spouts liberalism but when the threat to one's safety and freedom becomes real, where students at home are suppressed, this spirit evaporates. It is nice to protest about the shabby window dressing of the High Commission Student Office, and fashionable to be liberal. But when it is to protest about the real thing, about government repression and the sufferings of the people at home, Mr Oh argues that it's better not to play into the hands of 'communist agitators.' It is further against the will of almighty God fo disagree with authority. 'We must resist Communism' and to protest against the government would be to side with the communists. In a way quite true.

Therefore being consistent with this thinking our friend (or [unclear: JUDAS]) does funny little things like exposing himself as an apparent racist during Hamzah Kassim's talk at the Union Hall last September. He further exposed that he was defending the interest of the '20%' rich people in Malaysia. 'What about their democratic rights?' he yelled, backed by John Chin (Who also has an interesting history prior to reconversion) Steven Oh doubted that Hamzah Kassim who looked like an Indian, who happened to have a Malaysian name (many Indians had Malay names he said) had the right to speak for the poverty stricken people of Malaysia. Here is a man who two years ago up-held the ideals of freedom and equality. Of course, the now famous answer to his inhumanity and racism was, why he a Chinese had a Christian and European name, precisely summed up his middle class outlook in protecting his interests which must be through the preservation of the present fascist system. Is it a wonder why he is quiet up till now???

We now know his true nature and Malaysians should think about what sort of leaden they want in the MSA and at home in the Government. Leaders like Oh are many. The last president has to be pressured into action on the Khoo issue which is once again attracting our attention with report of his recent torture.

It should also be remembered that Oh promised many things in his election promises which has yet to be put into effect. He said looking after the political welfare of Malaysians here was an important aspect. This he honoured by not making any sounds since Tasck Utara, since the peasants of North Malaya marched, since the arrest of hundreds of Malaysians ... till doomsday. It is logical that we would endanger our freedom by speaking out against the government, it is therefore logical to shut up. True blue Christian or is it? MSA dances are being held contrary to the Faith, and debts owing to the Association by MSA are not honoured. This fact is well known since 1973. This is the 'Christian' approach to life. True humility and honesty.

'I'd rather be a heathen and a communist.'