Write on

November 17, 1993
Issue 

Brisbane police

I'm not surprised by the events of November 8 in Brisbane. There has since been much discussion regarding the general police attitude to Aboriginal people in Queensland. The police believe that relations have improved in recent years. From my experience, little has.

I've been living in Brisbane for a year now. In fact, living in the heart of a great deal of tension, Fortitude Valley. During that period I've seen little evidence of improved relations. The most recent incident I was witness to was two strip searches in the Valley of young Aboriginal males. One was more discreet than the other, but none-the-less an infringement of fundamental rights of the individual.

There is obvious disdain between the communities particularly as the police presence in the Valley is often invasive and intimidating. Patrol cars drive up and down the mall regularly, often disrupting pedestrians. On occasion I've witnessed these vehicles speed through the mall headlong into pedestrian traffic. On one occasion a cyclist was knocked off his bike as they were attempting to cross at a pedestrian crossing into the mall.

Indeed Brisbane displays a rawness on the streets I've not witnessed elsewhere in Australia. Whether this be the fault of the Police or the general disenchantment of peoples not so able to survive in a consumer orientated, market dominated, got to have a job society we live in is up for debate. But one thing is certain, I find myself uncomfortable in the presence of most police in Brisbane.
Andrew Garton
Brisbane

SA Elections

It is well known that the mainstream media are light on when it comes to giving people the facts, but when it's a race between tweedledum and tweedledee in the SA elections, they are seriously scrapping the bottom of the literary barrel.

Just to give readers a tidbit of the in depth reporting from Adelaide's Murdoch rag the Advertiser: We were presented with the battle between the moustaches of Kim Mayes, the Labor member for Unley, and his Liberal rival, Mark Brindal. More than a quarter page was devoted to their shenanigans, with one "brazenly lunching" in a deli across the road from the opposition campaign office. In yet another article we are offered an "ex-wrestler aiming at firm hold".

As people in SA prepare to sort their way through the morass of policy presentations of the mainstream parties and the array of alternatives, it seems that only Green Left Weekly will really be able to help decipher the options.
Melanie Sjoberg
Adelaide

Corsets

In "Write On" 13/10/93 I described how Freud was unable to find a physical explanation for his female patients' symptoms, so he proposed a psychological cause, but I suggested they were due to the then fashionable whalebone corsets which compressed or displaced internal organs.

In reply Ms Hanna Sharp (Write On 27/10) has assumed that I am unaware of the wider criticisms of Freud, however I can assure her that that is not the case.

I can also assure her that I was not belittling the distressing symptoms of hysteria by suggesting a physical basis, but was merely identifying and emphasizing the primary cause. For example, corsets interfered with breathing and circulation, so I suggest that women were constantly on the verge of fainting, and would hysterically faint in response to the mild emotions which would have little, or no effect on non-corseted women. The faint was relieved by unlacing the corset.

Ms Sharp also asked if tight bras are responsible for hysteria nowadays, but I suggest the ribs would somewhat protect the chest from their effect. Nevertheless last century the Russian military uniform included pantaloons buttoned tightly at the top and because that caused so much disease in soldiers, the wearing of suspenders was made compulsory.

Today, tight belts and girdles could have a similar effect, as could poor posture or the enlarging womb of pregnancy.

I also suggest that massive shockwaves from exploding bombs could displace internal organs, nerves and veins to produce the various symptoms of combat hysteria (shellshock) and the g-forces of violent car, train or ship collisions (e.g. the Voyager) could account for post traumatic hysterias.
M.A. Banfield
Modbury SA

Germs

On what grounds does Jane Reed base her assertion (Write on, GLW #120) that to publish the comment in GLW 119 questioning medical orthodoxy regarding germ theory and vaccinations gives credibility to a "lunatic fringe dweller of the type normally known only in extreme right wing anti-intellectual and anti-public health circles"?

It seems to me that GLW is (yet again) to be applauded for providing perhaps the only national forum in which to have a useful and informed discussion of the very serious public health issues which are raised by those questioning such medical procedures as mass vaccination programs.

If Reed had taken the time either to rebut McKinnon-Lower's assertions or to substantiate her own (some "obvious and unavoidable facts' might help?) I could enter into a more constructive debate.

Meanwhile Reed's attack on GLW allies her with that extreme right wing organisation, the AMA, in its suppression of free and informed debate regarding the efficacy of vaccination either as a public health strategy or in terms of individual health consequences.

Even the Public Health Associations Conference in 1991 on "Immunisation: the Old and the New" was unable to open a frank discussion of the issues due to both the AMA's use of the conference to launch their compulsory vaccination policies, and the sponsors of the event being multinational pharmaceutical giants Merck, Sharp and Dohme, Pasteur Merieux and Smith Kline Beecham (looking towards new and expanding markets, in the interest of public health and not private dollar no doubt).

It is ironic that Reed's letter appeared in the same issue as that raising the issue of medical chauvinism. Medical chauvinism is about much more than the sex of the doctor (although it does systematically impact far more on women).

Medical chauvinism leaves most people blind to the roles of different interests in regulating ideological debates over the cause and character of illness in contemporary capitalist society. Public health problems are political problems, and GLW is an appropriate forum for discussion of such issues.
Lara Pullin
Spence ACT

Russian farms

I wonder what is the general Green Left Weekly consensus on the recent attempts by Yeltsin to "privatise" Russian farms. At first, I label this as another example of Yeltsin taking a stance for "free market economy" instead of "genuine democracy" (something that the mainstream media have been very guilty of). I still haven't changed my viewpoint on that, but I'm beginning to believe that this is going to be one of the few things about Yeltsin's crazy policies that I approve of.

Not to mention the horror that I associate with collectivisation under Stalin, farm privatisation can also be seen as return of farms to the ownership of the peasants themselves, something that appears to me as pure common sense. "Returning land to peasants" is also something that the Sandinistas tried to do in the Nicaraguan Revolution.

The only thing that I fear about this, is that Yeltsin will not attempt to ensure land not being concentrated in the hands of a few big landowners, hence returning Russia to the days of feudalism. From what we know about Yeltsin, this seems very likely, especially when we consider that big landowners could become powerful supporters of Yeltsin, just as the kulaks were supporters of the Tsarist regime.

I hope this letter will engender more debates among Greens on the way for Russian peasants to go forward.
Aston Kwok
Ashfield NSW

Human rights

When I heard that a Professor Ross Garnaut had accused the Australian government of being too "raucous" on human rights issues in Asia (Sydney Morning Herald 28/10/93) I nearly choked on my muesli. It was the cue for Senator Gareth Evans to posture, incredibly, as a defender of other people's rights.

Is Professor Garnaut serious? Is he talking about the Australian government that conspires to hush up the Indonesian regime's conduct, at the U.N.? The same government that signed in our name the Timor Gap Treaty, to divide up the spoils of the 1975 invasion of East Timor? It will be interesting to see if any fellow Australian professors can sum up some coverage and integrity and challenge his words, as the Paddlers for Peace so valiantly challenged the three Indonesian ships in the harbour on Sunday, October 24.

For the sake of money the Australian government is saying what racist Europeans have always said, non-European lives are cheap. As if it is different for parents when their child disappears, depending on where they come from, or that non-Europeans somehow don't mind living in fear. The fact is that the collaboration with the Indonesian regime since the 1975 invasion of East Timor, has dragged Australia's name through the mud, internationally.

I know there are many worthwhile causes that deserve support, but I urge all GLW readers to join an East Timor solidarity group. The one I am NSW branch secretary of, is the Australia-East Timor Association (AETA). We have monthly meetings in Sydney and Melbourne. To join send $10 ($5 concession) to AETA, PO Box 93, Fitzroy, Vic 3065. You can phone me on (02) 331 5986.
Stephen Langford
Paddington NSW

You need Green Left, and we need you!

Green Left is funded by contributions from readers and supporters. Help us reach our funding target.

Make a One-off Donation or choose from one of our Monthly Donation options.

Become a supporter to get the digital edition for $5 per month or the print edition for $10 per month. One-time payment options are available.

You can also call 1800 634 206 to make a donation or to become a supporter. Thank you.