STANLEY KUBRICK DEAD AT 70 - A MEMORIAL PLEASANTVILLE: A CELEBRATION OF THE 90s

COMPULSARY VOLUNTARY STUDENT UNIONISM
Howard Government exercising thought control through lies

Countless times I've wondered "where do my union fees go? what do I get in return? They're such a rip off. I wish I didn't have to pay them." You hear the very same comments from the middle and upper classes who pay their taxes: "where do my taxes go? what do i get in return? etc." The fact is that sometimes we have to pay for things that we will never get our money's worth from. The fact is that sometimes we are FORCED to pay for things we don't want. We might not want to pay for the roads of car driver's to be kept smooth, nor may we want to pay for the losses our public transport system wallows in every year, nor may we want to pay for a single mother struggling to bring up her children in a world where money is more important than ever... but we do, and I think most of us think that in the end, we might pay too much but we have a stable society and a more tolerant society. It is also often true that the middle classes and the upper classes also get benefits that exceed those going to those on lower incomes - it's just that they're through concessions - concessions that allow multi-national corporations to set up shop in this country, concessions that allow people who can afford private health cover to save hundreds on the cost - a cost that would be far more effective going to the public health system. It is more than OK to question why we pay taxes, or why we pay voluntary student union fees, or why the AMA is a closed shop union, or why the Chartered Accountants are also a closed shop for accountants that want to be chartered. But in the end, we have to see that it is part of the society, and a necessary one. At Macquarie, they tried to introduce an up-front technology fee of 50 dollars on all students. If there was no student union, this would not have been abandoned, and God knows how much this fee would have been this year!

The real reason why the Howard Government is FORCING UNIVERSITIES to introduce voluntary student unionism (which defeats the whole purpose of their hypocritical argument) is to stop a vocal form of dissent. Student's have not acquiesed to the Howard regime - maybe because they're militant leftists. But whatever the reason, it shows the Government trying to use its power to silence vocal critics. They've done it also with interest groups they intend to fund - cutting off funding for any interest groups that have been overly critical (pensioner groups) while favouring those with a conservative agenda. No doubt, the Labor government also engaged in this behaviour - but never has it been so overt. Forcing a university to introduce voluntary student unionism OR ELSE NO FUNDING - is the ultimate form of blackmail. So much for "freedom of choice". If a university believes that an integral part of the university community is a student union (just like an integral part of a science degree might be to do an arts subject), then there is no reason why the Howard Government should force them on the matter.

I have struggled to see how one could argue in favour of compulsary student unionism - mainly because I am against coercion. But I also see the value of a society paying taxes. Taxation may be a form of economic slavery (where all subjects who work slave a portion of their work for the government), but it is a necessary good when it is redistributed to those who are not well off. Of course, student bodies often give money to the most ridiculous of interest groups within the university - but that is something students can change if they ACTIVELY PARTICIPATE in the process. I have no right to complain about this year's crop of student leaders because I didn't vote for them - nor did I bother complain or campaign. At Macquarie, the student body funds free internet access to anyone inside the university. THis is a great service. The Macquarie Union is also the cheapest of the main four unis. Perhaps some of the other unions need to fix up their acts - but because they might be inefficient, does not mean that voluntary student unionism should be introduced (just like some state govts do more on less taxes, that doesn't mean that we should take away money from inefficient govts, or not pay our taxes). The Howard Government is plain wrong in trying to silence a vocal student union group that often goes over the top with its criticisms - but by forcing the universities to introduce compulsary unionism they are proving that they do not mean that they are for "choice" - if they were for "choice" - they would allow the university to decide for itself. The vice chancellor's have rightly lobbied Senator Brian Harradine to dismiss the bill - because if it passes, it is yet another level of control that the government possesses over universities.

"We are never forced to do anything we don't want" - READ BRETT'S REBUTTAL

PS. There are similarities in the conservative approach to student unionism and the desire of some of them to ban Lolita (see below). I think they're pretty obvious.

WOOLLOOMOOLLOO CELEBRATES CHESSELL'S 21st

The local hoodlum's put aside their night of car window smashing and mugging as a sign of goodwill for Adam Chessell's 21st part. Held at the Tilbury Hotel, the party was an opportunity to recall ones "memories" of knowing him. One of the highlights of the evenings came when the speeches were made - including an eloquent and heart-felt speech by Adam's mother, followed by a brief speech by his father, who started a new Chessell tradition with a gold ring. From then, promises were made to allow dirt to be dished out. So, it was to Adam's friends that the floor turned its attention to.

CLICK HERE FOR FULL ARTICLE

Terminator Theory - The Primal Scene - Is it as whacky as I think?

EXCERPT 1 FROM PURE DRIVEL (PD) EXCERPT 2 FROM PD SIDE EFFECTS FROM PD

LIBERAL PARTY GOES CRAZY FOR LOLITA

I will reserve my judgement on Lolita until I have seen it, if I even think it is worth seeing. You see, Stanley Kubrick made a film based on the book 30 years ago. But what really angers me is the sheer hypocrisy of a Government that stood silent while Pauline Hanson marginalised Aborigines; and on this very day, stands curiously silent (I mean, John Howard not directly challenging the comments) on the disgusting comments made by John Elliot about Aborigines (and even worse than Pauline Hanson). Well, why does the Government stay silent on the issue of Aboriginal racism? Well, John Howard points out that when he came to government he promised an end to political correctness AND a more freedom of speech based society. Well, that's an OK position to take - which I happen to agree with. Pauline Hanson and John Elliot can say what they want (but the majority who disagree also have a responsibility to show how false their beliefs are). BUT, when so many backbenchers go on a rampage about film censorship - on a film THEY HAVE NOT SEEN and which the department of children's services says will not encourage paedophilic (nor for that matter the institute of criminology) behaviour - then I have to question the type of "freedom of speech" we have in this country. At the very least, it is a new form of political correctness - a political correctness that lets racists say what they want, when they want it, without any criticism from the Government (leaving it to the communist ABC and SMH to report and dismiss) - and a political correctness that lets the government enter into discussions of film censorship or of banning films that discuss CRIMINAL ACTS (how many times has murder been depicted on our screens?) or are "too wierd sexually" but are in no way going to encourage people to enter into those criminal acts themselves. If someone watches a CLOCKWORK ORANGE and goes and commits a similar crime, that does not mean he or she would never have committed that crime - similarly, Lolita will not encourage sane people to go out and start having sex with 14 year olds. I sometimes think that it's maybe a conservative paranoia that they will become "infected" if they watch anything but brady bunch like stories - it's as if something different will change them. It is part of that hope that things can return to the way they were in the fifties! What a great time that was. And indeed when you look at the fact that McCarthyism was starting up, you begin to understand the sheer corruption of what those backward liberals and nationals are proposing. It seeks to rule things, people and art as "not right", and if a film doesn't fit in with their ideology, then it cannot be right. If they don't get the subtext to the film (like a clockwork orange has an amazingly powerful subtext), then it cannot be right and normal. As I said, I haven't seen Lolita - but I'll take the word of an already OVERLY CONSERVATIVE (yes, the board has Howard appointees and members of the public viewing the films) film censorship board (that asked for a masterpiece like Spielberg's Private Ryan to be cut in parts until some media figures made an issue of it) COUPLED with the advice from the institute of criminology and child protection services over the word of idiots who haven't seen it - and would not even dare to have the guts to stand up to racism - which I feel given the difference in what we're talking about (a film that hardly anyone will see vs racism - which is still inherent in our society) is totally justified. Some of these people need to grow up and let the experts do their work. It's not for backward minded people to define what is and isn't art - it's for no-one to define that really (except ourselves) - but someone has to do it in difficult circumstances. It certainly shouldn't be this Government.

MACH3 PROMISES NEW SHAVING EXPERIENCE 07-03-1999 It was six months ago that I first read about the Mach3 in a story that struck me as extremely funny in the New Yorker magazine. It wasn't until I read the article that I realised how serious a business the shaving market is - Gillette spent ONE BILLION dollars on this evolutionary 3 blade machine. One of their major scientists came out of NASA. The intricacies involved in finding the right metal for the blade, and how to add an extra blade without cutting the skin was a major achievement for Gillette. So much so, that the shaving experience of a Mach 3 is not only superior to their already good Gillette SensorExcel blade, but it actually does not cause as much irritation. The explanations of what each blade does, read out like the lateshow skit "Gillette 20". Well, I always said the lateshow was prophetic. So it was with much anticipation and expectation that I went out to Coles a month ago and purchased the Mach3 shaving system (the last left on the shelf). There was no disappointment with the results - I'm sure the shave is closer (though I'm a hopeless shaver) but I used to get very very irritated before; now there is hardly any. The catch ofcourse to this superior shaving experience is a mark-up in the price of the blade - I think the article said 25%. Gillette's billions will have paid off in less than a year as their already big profit margins escalate. I think we're generally more willing to pay for a good product if it delivers, and this one does. Apart from the actual blade itself (being 3 blades), the part that stores the blade attaches and is completely flexible. In any 2-blade system, the head is hardly flexible. This one tilts almost completely to a perpendicular position with the rest of the system. There is also an 'indicator' strip similar to the Oral B toothbrush - it tells you when the blade is not effective. No doubt if you're like martinmolloy you'll not worry about that indicator. Anyway, all in all an evolutionary, not revolutionary blade system that will revitalise Gillette from its competitors - who only have two blades. More is better in this case it a truism. CLICK HERE TO READ THE NEW YORKER ARTICLE ON MACH3

MUSICAL EDITION

I haven't really been talking much about music on this page lately (to go to regular AV, scroll down). But there are some excellent songs and albums floating about the place worth talking about. On Triple J a few weeks back, Merrick and Rosso played the world premiere of a SILVERCHAIR song called "Emotion Sickness". It was one of the best songs I've heard in a long time - it is the most unusual, interesting and mature pieces of musical writing from an Australian band in ages. I can't believe that the lead singer writes this stuff because there's almost a piano-concerto feeling to the track mixed in with the Silverchair thing (maybe he writes the song, and someone orchestrates it). If this song is as good as I think it is (after only one and a half hearings), it will go to number one. The only problem is its long length and its wierd ending (it seems extended) as well as its maturity - it is not immediately accessable to the youth market, but it still has the silverchair signature on it. It's a grand and ambitious song that makes the Anthem for the Year 2000 look insignificant next to it. David Helfgott played the piano for this track, so I can't wait to see the video clip. I want to know whether the piano part was written or if it has furiosa improvisation - bits of it are almost like Rachmaninov.

Lauryn Hill won for Album of the Year at the 1999 Grammy Awards. Interested in seeing her work after a brilliant live performance at the award's ceremony, I bought the album. Indeed, apart from Hello Nasty, it is the best album. But where it far exceeds the Beastie Boys is in emotion and in pure musicality in the traditional sense. Her voice is amazing - you can almost touch it it conveys that much. Her song "To Zion", an ode to her son, is one of the most deeply spiritual, life affirming and well constructed songs to come out in a long time. The simplicity of its lyrics and its meaning shifts it onto a level of brilliance - note the use of language: Unsure of what the balance held/I touched my belly overwhelmed/By what I had been chosen to perform/But then an angel came one day/Told me to kneel down and pray/for unto me a man child would be born/Woe this crazy circumstance/I knew his life deserved a chance/But everybody told me to be smart/Look at your career they said/"Lauryn, baby, use your head"/But instead I chose to use my heart Now the joy of my world is in Zion/Now the joy of my world is in Zion

The other Album of the year that I would chose is Beasie Boys' Hello Nasty album. Not many people may like the Beastie Boys, but it is a very unique style of music they present - amazingly, whether they're playing hard-core punk, hip hop, rap, or a bit of both - there's a recognisable style to it. Hello Nasty is a return to a more mainstreamish vision - not that they necessarily invisioned it - it is that the mainstream has caught up to their post-modern style of music. Endless referencing - mostly without parody - to create a unique and interesting song shows why not all forms of post-modernism are "unoriginal". The fact that Body Movin' has been wonderfully re-mixed by Fat Boy Slim is a testament to their great style (and also very interesting since they already mix into their song stuff - it's like getting a double mix!). A more detailed review will follow soon on this site - once all the oscar stuff is finished.

CLICK HERE TO GO TO A GUIDE TO THE MUSIC AWARDS AT OSCARS

CHICKAS CAMPAIGN HQ: THE DAILY TELE

The hardest campaigners for Chickas are not Michael Photios or Phillip "whoever the deputy is" Whatever, but by the Murdoch owned Daily Telegraph. Front page headlines over the last few weeks have been dominated by stories that aim to invoke sympathy in voters for Chickas, and constantly highlight the failures of the Labor Party. Today's headline read: THE HOSPITAL OUT CHILDREN SHARE WITH COCKROACHES". The message was loud and clear: Carr govt sucks. There's no real mention of the Carr Government in the article, nor does the tele need any input from the opposition (they'd probably stuff it up). The other day it was PAM ALLEN and her save the cockroach tax payer funded junket that hit the front pages. The overt campaigning for chickas started in the sympathy piece about her polling so far behind that she was a real chance of losing. Since then, the tele has single handedly resurrected the NSW Liberal Party's highly inept campaigning - it's so bad, they failed to excite and even created more enemies in the 1000 dollar electricity cash give-away.

I've been trying to figure out why the Murdoch press has turned so viciously against Carr over the last few weeks. IS there a personal vendetta? No way. Carr took a lot of political heat over his signing away the Sydney Showground site to Fox Studios (owned by Murdoch). The other option is that the Murdoch press is trying to resurrect the campaign for the liberals so that we'll have a tight race. If the polls narrow and the Murdoch press becomes more objective, perhaps this is true. So far anyway, the Tele may as well be the official Liberal Party campaign organisers (page 19 - "Kerry's invisible angels" - a story about Kerry's all female security team), leaving all the negativity surrounding their campaign to small sections of the newspaper. It's something to keep an eye out - always fascinating to see the way news is constructed - it shows ever so brilliantly how "truth" may not be something so easy to ascertain considering that all stories are told subjectively (ie. there may be facts, but how we perceive them may to us seem true but to others is constructed differently).

POLICE SEEKING "PANTDITS" AS BONFIRE RAGES OUT OF CONTROL

A group of youths were spotted in the busy NSW coastal town of Scarbrough lighting fires and attempting to have ambers fly into neighbouring properties. Police also report that a woman was also seen ramaging the beach for "more wood, I need more wood" in order to make the fire even more dangerous. The fire was so bad that there was a near miss at Woollongong Airport as the pilot of an Impantas flight mistook the raging "bonfire" for the Port Kembla refinery, landing on the busy Princess Highway. The Australian Voice has received annonymous information from one of the "louts" present:

"It was so cool, we lit a fire with wet wood, we never thought it could happen, but we wanted it so large that it burnt the shit out of the whole suburb - you know, why should these people out here have it so good with their great views and fresh air. They should all suffer. But unfortunately it rained just because we burnt the town down."

Such positively criminal behaviour may have resulted due to a man they call Dr Strangelove. Strangelove was apparently absent from the activities due to an "early night". However, the AV has revealed that Strangelove is working on a secret explosive device, and the others from the group wanted to upstage his efforts. And they sure did. Police forces spent 100 thousand dollars alone on the search for these criminal youths. All evidence of fingerprints have been burned and footprints in the sand washed away. The only remaining piece of evidence is a solitary underpant in the scarbrough carpark - with the words "The Pantdits" sprawled across it.

return to archives

return to main page