Unknown Speaker  00:01
By contrast to power built on workplace organization, welfare state programs seem to make people dependent. They co opt people. They even fragment workplace identities, and distract people from the main agenda of political reform, which presumably should be the reorganization of the economy. I think this sort of analysis and prognosis about what the welfare state means for power is very gloomy, and especially gloomy for women, and for minorities. And the reason it's so gloomy is that while women are moving into the workplace, they're not moving into those parts, those cut the kinds of workplaces into those parts of the labor market, where they are likely to follow the path of industrial workers and exercise strike power, and union power to the contrary, they're moving into those parts of the labor market, which have historically been the most difficult to organize, and are almost surely more difficult to organize. Now, in the face of capital flight, if women are going to exercise power, it is very likely the case that they have to find ways of finding power within the context of their involvement with the welfare state. Which leads me to say that the critique which argues that welfare state programs, rob people and women, especially if power is much too simple, it's true that the program's fragment, it's true, that they co OPT. At the same time, I think it's also the case that the availability of benefits for older women has given these women some security and therefore some power in family relations and specially especially in relation to the adult children on whom they would otherwise have been completely dependent, and who they would otherwise have been completely subject to. In a similar way, I think the availability of programs like unemployment insurance, or AFDC, and food stamps and Medicaid. For younger women, raising their children, has also been a source of some security and therefore, some defense against male breadwinners to whom they would otherwise be entirely exposed. And I think also that the availability of these programs and now I include programs like unemployment insurance, has been a source of security and therefore have power to women in the workplace. Remember, these women are working in jobs where they are not unionized, where employers hold the constant threat, terror really, of being fired over the heads of women in fast foods and hospitals and office cleaning jobs. And for these women to the knowledge that they can turn to AFDC food stamps or Medicaid that they and their children will not be homeless has been some source of power in the workplace. More important, I think, that are maybe not more important, but just as important. I think the institutions of the welfare state have generated possibilities for political mobilization that have heretofore been virtually entirely ignored. Political mobilizations. Now, visa vie the state the mobilization of women against the state on which they are presumably made dependent by welfare state programs. I think we've ignored this possibility, despite the instances, the experiences we've had, for example, of a movement like welfare rights were the recipients of AFDC did organize and did have some impact. We haven't paid too much attention to the success of older women. In resisting the attempted cuts in the Social Security program and the Medicare program. In the last few years. We haven't had much to say in a theoretical spirit, about the successes of social welfare organizations. These are organizations created by the welfare state organizations of employees and organizations of agencies who have mobilized both on the national level and on the state level, to resist the budget cuts. And with a fair amount of success, they didn't reverse them, but they did stop them in the course of the second year, with the result that the deficit grew.

Unknown Speaker  04:53
Now, given the kinds of powerful business interests that are clamoring to To reduce the bit the deficit, the ability of these groups to stop social welfare cuts and maintain the deficits is something to wonder about. I think there is another important possibility for the mobilization of resistance of women through the welfare state. It was signaled some 10 days ago by the Democratic primary in New York State, some 350,000 More people voted, then had voted in the 1980 primary. And when the count was in, it turned out that women were 58% of the voters in the New York state primary. That event confirmed a pattern that has been developing over the last couple of years. In 1982, there was a rise of 10 million people and electoral participation 10 million more than the previous midterm election. And that rise was the result of increased voting among the unemployed among minorities and among women. That may be very significant. Its significance is suggested by the election of 1980, in which only half the American electoral electorate voted, oh, repetition have a long standing pattern in American electoral politics, in which about half votes in the 20th century and presidential elections. And that half is the better half better off half of the American electorate. Well, political scientists have puzzled a lot about why that is. So because the United States has the lowest turnout of any major democracy. If I had more than 15 minutes, I could in a very sober and judicious way, review the theories that they have produced. But then I would come to the conclusion, which I'll now give you without the review. That low turnout in the United States in the 20th century, and especially low turnout. Among those who are worse off is directly traceable to the extraordinary electoral procedures we have in the United States, which make it difficult for people to vote, and especially personal voter registration. That system of obstructions which was put in place around the turn of the century, by planter interests who mobilized in the south, and industrial interests who mobilized in the north, to change state election laws. So as to disenfranchise some groups outright, with poll taxes and literacy tests and so forth, and to make the remainder of working and poor people make it much more difficult for them to vote through because through the elaborate rigmarole of personal voter registration, which made it impossible for people to register to vote when an election approached closed six months before an election, which eliminated voter registration places in working class towns in mining towns, which made voter registration available only during working hours and only differ a couple of days a year. And so on. That system was put in place in the first place by a class mobilization industrialists and planters. But it has been kept in place throughout the 20th century, by the interests of political incumbents, who do not want a new electorate. And who will mobilize themselves whenever any proposal for election reform is made. Well, I said a moment ago that there was signs of a surge, more people are turning out. And that's true. But the procedural obstructions that account for low turnout in the United States are still in place. And therefore for this surge to be realized, for the polarization of the electorate, which is now taking place, and the electorate that's been activated by current policies of the Reagan administration, for it really to be fully expressed and fully realized in a surge to the polls. People have to be helped to overcome the obstacles to voter registration.

Unknown Speaker  09:44
And one way to do that is to take advantage of the vast apparatus of social welfare agencies that have come into existence in the United States. That Those agencies reach into every community into the in the country, they reach into poor neighborhoods and into working class neighborhoods. The people who staff those agencies are mainly women, and minorities. And the people who depend upon those agencies who come to these agencies continually in continual streams, for benefits and for services are mainly women, and minorities. I'm working on a voter registration campaign tema man, as Matt mentioned it, it's called human serve. It's a campaign that's been endorsed by 20, national social welfare organizations calling for an agency registration. And it's a campaign that now has organizers in 13 states in the United States, the campaign is beginning to spread. And across the country, welfare offices, Planned Parenthood offices, other family planning agencies, daycare agencies, health clinics, well, baby clinics, the workers in these systems are beginning to offer help with voter registration to the women who come to them for services and for benefits. The potential of this kind of development is enormous. Because no one is going to create an enormous voter registration campaign oriented toward the poor, and especially toward poor women, no one is going to give $10 million for such an effort. But this is a way to take advantage of a set of institutional arrangements that are already in place. And in complicated ways, I know that it's complicated and ambivalent, have brought better often better educated women who work in the agencies into a regular relationship with 10s of millions of women who depend upon the agencies. I feel a certain a urgency about this development about voter registration. I suppose part of the reason for the urgency is evident. In 1984, we're going to elect a president and there is no way I think, to overstate the significance of the American presidency, the next president is going to decide whether to intervene or not intervene in regional conflicts across the globe. The next president, by his legislative and administrative initiatives is going to decide on the outlines of our social policies, our environmental policies, and also on the main outlines of our private economy, what we call our private economy, as it's reorganized to take account of international competition. And rapidly increasing technological change, the next president is going to decide whether to push the button or not to push the button. And the next president is also going to create the kind of cultural the kind of political environment which makes possible the encouragement of the hopes, the aspirations and the political movements, by women, by minorities by poor people in the United States, or he will create a political environment, which crushes those hopes and those aspirations for all those reasons. I feel a certain urgency about what happens in 1984. But I also think it matters who is in the American electorate in the longer run. I don't think it is a complete solution to the political problems of the United States to finally begin to include poor working people, women minorities, in the American electoral universe, but I do think it is one step we can take that would make a difference. Thank you.

Unknown Speaker  14:19
Okay, okay, fine. I'm sorry. It's for anybody. Anybody who spent very much time around this community Columbia University in the past year, has found it hard to Miss Barbara rands be as CO chairperson for the free South Africa committee. She's done. I won't say more than anybody but she certainly been up there in in awakening people's consciousness to the relationship between the ownership of stock in this university and and the labor conditions and social conditions in South Africa. It's my pleasure to introduce Barbara rands me does this work okay.

Unknown Speaker  15:37
And it follows follow Grace Paley's lead and remain seated. I've a load I'm carrying with me these days, it's gotten heavier as the day's progressed, so I feel more comfortable staying seated. I want to speak briefly about the need to incorporate anti racist politics into the formulation of a progressive feminist agenda. This seems to me quite consistent with the theme of this conference, especially since women of color have historically been in the lead of struggles for social change in this country and indeed, around the world. I also want to draw some parallels with the situation in South Africa, the struggle for freedom in that country, because I think we can learn a lot. And that situation can help us to clarify the need and importance for such a synthesis. Over the past few years, as Tim mentioned, I've been involved in an anti racist struggle on this campus and the campus across the street. The particular demand of that struggle has been to get this university to get Columbia University that is to divest its holdings in those companies that do business in southern Africa, those investments, those investments amounted to over $44 million at this point. In any event, this political involvement, as well as the meetings and discussions I've had with a number of black and progressive White South Africans, have led me to attempt to make some comparisons between the situation in South Africa and the struggle against racism and sexism in this country. With all due respect to the uniqueness of the South African situation, I do think that there are some comparisons that can be made, and some lessons learned from the two situations. In a very general sense, both countries are multiracial societies, where historically racism has been used to guarantee the super exploitation of the non white population. In this country, there is still de facto segregation. There is still de facto disenfranchisement of a large section of a non white population. And the economic oppression of people of color in this country seems to increase day by day, especially under the policies of the current administration. All of these aspects of racism certainly exist in South Africa. They exist too much drink greater degree, and they are more visible and blatant in their appearance. And the enforcement is much more brutal. Consequently, the overt and undeniable expressions of racism, which exist in South Africa, lead very few progressive people to conclude that the struggle against racism and sexism can be divorced. Like most progressive minded people in that country recognize that the two struggles are inseparable, and have to be. In this country, the more subtle nature of racism doesn't always make the necessity for such a synthesis very clear. So I think we need to constantly remind ourselves of the importance of incorporating anti racist politics into a progressive feminist agenda. A quick look at the racial realities and the dynamics of resistance in South Africa, I think, make it even clearer. In South Africa, 23 million non white people suffer under one of the most brutal and racist regimes on the face of the earth. For those of you who may not be familiar with some of the details of the apartheid system, it's a system where 72% of the population which happens to be non white, are denied some of the most basic political and human rights is a system where black workers earn only a fraction of the wages of their white counterparts by law. It's a system where over 50% of black children fail to reach the age of five because they die of malnutrition or lack of health care. It's a country where a set of racist passed laws are the jubilantly enforced, these laws make black and other non white people in that country essentially prisoners in their, their own homeland. They're required to carry past books 24 hours to prove that they are legitimately in white areas. That's the reality for the people who live in South Africa. Now, women of color in South Africa suffer doubly, from the kind of oppressive regime that is in power there. They suffer both because they are people of color and because they are women.

Unknown Speaker  20:37
You because racism has perverted and permeated every aspect of life in that country. Women of Color can never separate racial oppression and class oppression from the gender based oppression they feel as women. Consequently, any progressive feminist movement which emerges in that country must at the same time be a consciously anti racist movement. Otherwise, it threatens to become an unconsciously racist one. In fact, racism and separatist ideology is a constant thread to the strength and unity of all progressive movements in that country. The history of South African Women's resistance to both racism and sexism within the context of a single struggle also makes it clear why any progressive feminist movement must also be an anti racist one. This morning, I participated in the workshop on women's resistance in South Africa. And I think there was a good example in that workshop of why this particular point is true. We saw a film called you've struck a rock that some of you may have heard of. And the title is quite appropriate. Because in the 1950s, when black women of South Africa rose up to oppose the racist pass laws in that country, the Almighty South African government had indeed struck a rock. And the heroic leadership of these women continues to be an inspiration to the liberation struggle there and to those of us in this country who are involved in anti racist movement. In that struggle, women marched and demonstrated and rallied and confronted the on South African Police. Hundreds of them were jailed, and dozens were killed in that struggle. Now, of course, the struggle against the past laws, was not only a struggle of women, but was the struggle of women in which women gave leadership to men. The past laws not only affect non white women in South Africa, but affect non white men as well. Nevertheless, because of the aspect because the aspect of their oppression, which these women chose to focus on, was not strictly gender based, does not mean that it is any less legitimate, or that is irrelevant to progressive feminist movement. These kinds of struggles are crucially relevant. That becomes quite evident in a situation such as South Africa, it has to be more evident to us in this country. In the case of black women's resistance to the past laws, while on the surface, the struggle may not appear to have been an explicitly anti sexist one. It was indeed that as well as an anti racist struggle. These women had to overcome a number of obstacles in order to engage in the kind of courageous struggle and campaign that they engaged in. The first obstacle was their own sexes training, and fear of engaging in political activity, especially confrontational activity. The second was probably the struggle within men to accept their leadership and to accept their militancy. Thirdly, and perhaps with most difficulty, they had to find the courage and strength within themselves to challenge one of the most militaristic and repressive governments. There is the South African government. And the challenge of these women to the fascist, white male dominated power structure of South Africa was a blow not only for those women, but for all oppressed women. It was a blow for all oppressed, oppressed people. And again, it's the kind of struggle which has to be relevant to any progressive feminist movement. It is undeniably relevant, I think, to all of us. In this country, as well as in South Africa, the inclusion of anti racist politics in the women's movement is equally as crucial. It's particularly crucial at this point in time when a number of people live under the illusion that racism in this country is either dead or dying. Unfortunately, this couldn't be further from the truth. If we need proof of it, I think we can venture beyond the iron gates out front and down the hill a bit. And there are a number of aspects of life in the community that surrounds this one that will show us that racism is unfortunately alive and well. It exists in Harlem. It exists in Bed Stuy, and exist in Detroit and Chicago and whites and 100 other places we could name.

Unknown Speaker  25:33
Racism is not only still alive, but it is in fact on the rise right now. And as was pointed out before, I think a number of the attacks in social services, particularly health care, demonstrate this. These cutbacks have been felt the sharpest by working class women of color. Women in a minimum wage jobs, women on welfare women with men with no jobs, and children to feed. Just as in South Africa, I think most working class women of color in this country find it very difficult to separate their racial and class oppression, from the gender based oppression they feel as women. Any progressive feminist movement in this country, I think, has to take that into account. In this regard, I think that it's quite appropriate that the underlying theme of this conference, in addition to its focus on resistance, has attempted to give particular emphasis to the struggles of women of color and ethnic women. Despite the weaknesses that Barbara Smith pointed out, which is certainly more than evident to all of us that the disgracefully low number of minority women that are here today, I nonetheless think that the topic organization represents some step in the right direction. Unfortunately, other conferences like this that I've attended, the women of color tend to gravitate toward one workshop, which has a topic related to racism. And again, we preach to the converted and talk among ourselves about the need for fighting racism. It's clearly a much healthy, and much healthier, unnecessary dynamic, I think, for all of us to come together and discuss the implications of fighting racism as it affects all of us. This approach reflects the view that racism is not simply a black issue or a Latin issue. But it's an issue which all progressive people have a stake in. In fact, historically, racism has been used to divide and weaken virtually every progressive movement, which has emerged in this country, from the labor movement, the early women's suffrage movement, the anti war movement of the 60s, none of these have been exempt. But we can learn some things from not only the situation in South Africa, but from this history, and guarantee that it doesn't repeat itself. Yet another time. I think there's some specific ways that we can learn from this history and move toward developing an anti racist and progressive feminist agenda. First, I think it's necessary to link up with anti racist struggles. Even though the particular demands of those struggles are not always gender based. Second, I think the fight against internal racism has to be stepped up within the women's movement by integrating discussions of racism into broader feminist dialogues. Thirdly, I think we have to acknowledge that we live in a class society, where the overwhelming majority of women of color are part of the working class, and are the most oppressed section of the society. And this recognition has to lead us to support the political and economic struggles of these women in a more concrete way. In conclusion, I just like to re emphasize that we look at this situation in South Africa, the attempt to define a progressive feminist perspective in that country and look at other historical examples and move in the direction of incorporating anti racist ideas into a progressive feminist agenda for the 80s and the 90s. Thank you. One of the sad

Unknown Speaker  29:43
truths

Unknown Speaker  29:44
about the left and I think the feminist movement in this country is that we are often more noticed by our adversaries than we recognize our own strength. We look read the and listen to the Nixon Watergate tape If we understood how scared they actually were, by the massive demonstrations in the streets, and by the opposition in the streets and throughout society to the Vietnam War, I think when we learn the history of the Reagan administration and what almost happened in the fall and what may still happen again, but what I'm seeing very likely in October, November and December about an invasion, or a bombing of Nicaragua, we may learn that when in fact, our mobilizations are more than half hearted efforts to get out people and raise consciousness about what was going on may have have won us and the Nicaraguan people, the first round at the center of those struggles for many organizations, not the least of them was Lusaka, US out of Central America. And one of the most articulate spokespeople for that group is our last speaker, Elizabeth Martinez, thank you.

Unknown Speaker  31:13
Let me just begin by saying that I am glad to be the last speaker, in fact, because there's some very practical suggestions and ideas that I want to leave people with here today. In addressing the topic of women and resistance, I think we come to the question, inevitably of resistance against what and the related question, Why should women in particular resist? I would like to speak to these questions today, and to take the example of Nicaraguan women as they lived before the overthrow of samosa as allies have changed in Sandinista society, and as they now resist the attempt by our own government to destroy that new society. Before the Sandinista victory in 1979, Nicaraguan women stood alongside the women of all Central American countries, as part of what we I think we need to see as a great global pool of cheap labor, that labor is super exploited for the benefit of a world economy. It's a world economy that is capitalist, and it's a world economy over which the United States had very clear domination. Until very recently, that women in Nicaragua as in these other countries have been super exploited in two areas, through unpaid labor and in the home, and through underpaid labor as workers, whether they were in fact employed or not. This super exploitation, which in fact, supports this entire economic system of the world is sustained in turn by male supremacist definitions of women and their labor. And I think the key to these definitions is the concept of domestic labor as a private service to the husband to another individual or a small family unit, rather than seeing it as part of the family's whole social function. It is social, it is not private, but has been mystified so that we see as a private function, this entire reproduction of labour power generation of new workers within this capitalist world system. That mystification has made it possible to devalue and undervalue women's labor. There are many lessons for us, I think, for all women, in the analysis along these lines of Marlene Dixon about the interrelationship between sexism and capitalism, her work laid the analytical basis for a major insight of the women's movement. And that is that the status of women is not a national issue. It is an international issue. And that sexism like racism is endemic to this capitalist system and to imperialism. What I'm saying then, really is where I'm speaking them about the centrality of women in a great global struggle. We're not some, we're not just a little bit more exploited. It's a there's a fundamental significance about the role of women within that, that world economy that makes them what women do and their resistance central to a whole worldwide process. Now for women in the third world, there is the additional element of imperialist domination. under the heel, a heavy heel of the US Empire, women of color have experienced the most acute forms of super exploitation. The problem with imperialism, however, is that it engenders very ferocious resistance. Because it clearly oppresses not just a sector a segment of a population, but the entire people. I think when we look at the women of Nicaragua, we see these realities I've been describing, very clearly illustrated. For decades. They endured super exploitation as part of that worldwide, working class of the countries that we call peripheral or semi peripheral. Third World underdeveloped countries in relationship to this capitalist developed countries. They were if you like, the Chiquita bananas of the banana republic, from the viewpoint of the corporations which have now become transnational, in their exploitation of this kind of labor. Now, their labor enabled the making

Unknown Speaker  36:13
of vast really monstrously inflated profits. They Nicaraguan women also experienced the effects of all the ideological forces and institutions that uphold male supremacy. The Latino version, of course, is called machismo. This the same is same idea of seeing women's labor as a private service to a man as that's the foundation, then for devaluation. There's a single statistic that I ran across very recently, which I think conveys very clearly what it meant to be a woman in Nicaragua. Under US imperialist domination. Before the overthrow of semasa. The general illiteracy rate in Nicaragua was 42%, but the illiteracy rate for women was 93%.

Unknown Speaker  37:14
In other words, if we can Anglos general population was exploited by US interests. It was women who provided the bulwark for the entire edifice of imperialist domination to an astounding and enraging degree. But Nicaraguan women also have a tradition of resistance, which dates back to the refusal of Indigenous women to bear children, because their children will be born into slavery. And from the early days of the Zionist movement, women participated in all forms of struggle they fought, they nursed, they carry messages clandestinely, of course, they cooked and clean, and they died. They also organized themselves. The first organization that took real roots was based, as in other Latin American countries. And we heard about that in a panel this morning, on women's protests against the disappeared, husband, sons brothers, this was an prolec. It carried out massive protests, that was a very broad based cross class movement. And originally, there were many upper class women in product as a struggle against samosa intensified, the class lens tended to sharp and many of those women left. And and this was inevitable, I think, because it became clear every day that the specific grievances of women require a change in the entire existing system. The repression that the women encountered from unprotect made this clear, to the point where it came down to many women understanding the stakes, and indeed, losing their fear of death. Or, on the other hand, retreating to class privilege, and identification with the system. By the time of the 70s, to triumph I'm from that was a mass movement with 1000s of women. And it laid the basis for the Organization of Women in the new society. The changes in the lives of Nicaraguan women, which have taken place since 1979, have been massive and fundamental. There's no way I can describe them all here today. But let me just point to a few. They are, first of all the profound changes, which all Nicaragua's one, it's a result of the ending of you know, the kind of exploitation experienced under imperialism and the floody, tyranny of samosa these benefits to women also, the near ending of illiteracy and the total disappearance of one's common diseases are just examples of that. For women in particular, there are new laws passed was 97, which I think are very interesting because They give such a clear picture of what it was like in the past, as well as of course holding up the promise of of change for the future. And there is a law that says Men cannot be paid for work women do in cotton and coffee cultivation. In other words, in the past, the women did the work, the men got the pay. This was a common practice. There are laws extending Social Security benefits to women, and establishing equal pay, neither of which existed before, there are laws concerning adoption, alimony and family relations that really challenge patriarchal authority and the subject of massive debate all over Nicaragua, there is a law outline outlining the use of women as sex symbols in advertising.

Unknown Speaker  40:53
The thing that's very striking when you when you visit there is the massive participation of women in and in leading roles throughout the society. Just a few quick statistics. Women are 55% of the adult education workers who are called brigadistas 88% of the vaccine vaccination workers, they form 60 to 70%. Of the all Nicaraguans who do guard duty in the neighborhoods and marketplaces as a protection against the contracts. They form 48% of the militia. The national women's organization today is called M ly, named after Louisa Amanda Espinosa, the first woman to die in combat against the masa. Interesting also the fact that unlike holds an official seat in the Council of State, in other words, the interests of women as women are recognized officially and represented officially a step which not even most socialist countries have taken. All this integration has come about largely through the participation of women in the mass organizations, which is and that is the key to the kind of emancipation that has happened. And the result, I think you feel this there is nothing less than a level of dignity and well being and a recognition of women's humanity that never existed under US imperialism. Now, what is happening today? What is happening today, very clearly, is a massive effort spearheaded by Reagan to turn the clock back by supporting the Contras. What can he mean except restoring the society from which women have great degrees. And it's an ongoing struggle, but have been have been liberated from in Nicaragua, it is bringing back all the oppression all the exploitation before, and therefore it is women who have the most to lose. In Nicaragua as one example, from the policies of the United States from the entire counter revolution. I think we need to see Reagan support for the contrast as part of a foreign policy that can only be called fascist, by virtue of its support for dictatorial regimes, or the ending of society. Bad foreign policy is more domestically in policies that's and stands on women in the United States, for example, on the right to choose, which also represent a return to the past a NEO fascist spirit. So here we have a fascist kind of foreign policy and domestically, the mirror of that, that we all know so well, then I think we can begin to understand the mining of Nicaraguan harbors, is nothing less than part of a whole effort to turn out one of the few lights in this hemisphere, a light that's right here very close to us and to our own lives. We need to understand US policy today is a product of that empire that I spoke about earlier, that had such an effect on women's lives in Nicaragua, among other countries, an empire in decline at a time of crisis in that entire capitalist world economy. Since Vietnam, the United States has been steadily losing its political influence and economic power around the world. Yet the government retains its belief that it can act as the world's policeman is unable to impose its political or diplomatic will on other nations. So it turns increasingly to military adventurism. Reagan is acting out what has been described by Marlon Dixon as the Suez syndrome, which is the last ditch effort of a declining power to preserve its shrinking influence when it can no longer impose its will on the on its allies or the world and she He compares United States today to Great Britain in 1956, when it foolishly and hopelessly, and in total isolation almost attempted to prevent the nationalization by Egypt of the Suez Canal. That was the last gasp of a dying, isolated empire, refusing to recognize the reality of worldwide change. But the Suez syndrome is not simply a threat to Nicaragua. Today, what we see is an interventionist foreign policy, combined with the belief that nuclear war is winnable. The highest civilian and military leadership in the United States actually think that the United States can win a nuclear war with the Soviet Union and that we must prepare to win it. Think the damaging of the Soviet tanker

Unknown Speaker  45:53
off the coast of Nicaragua, by minds that the CIA placed is a classic scenario for the escalation of a local US military intervention into a worldwide nuclear disaster, it becomes all the more likely when we realize that the United States cannot, in fact, when in Central America, it cannot turn back the tide of people's struggle and revolutionary movement.

Unknown Speaker  46:28
It cannot stop it. Unless it's by bombing back to the Stone Age of Reagan's face, that is the only way it cannot stop it otherwise. But that is precisely again, why the danger seems so great today. Now, the weak point of the escalating militarism lies in the opposition of the American people. And this is where we must look for hope, to whatever degree the brakes have been put on Reagan's policies, it's thanks to public protest. You suck us out of Central America, the organization with which I work has been part of the effort to mount that protest. And we see as particularly important, leaking together, the anti interventionist forces in this country, and the anti nuclear, anti war, peace movements for precisely the reasons I have described and talking about the great dangers today. You suck it is a national organization, tell you just a little bit about it. Committed to the building of a massive movement against US intervention and militarism. It carries out a wide range of activities that include educational work demonstrations, lobbying, teachings, delegation, snicker, and so forth. We have a table here today, where you can get literature about our work. And I'd like to introduce Janice Lewin over there, you should stand up, Janice, he's got a hand up, who is an organizer, and would be very glad to talk to you. Let me tell you now about three immediate campaigns or areas of work, in which I would very much like to urge you to participate. First of all, there is a new campaign to support Nicaragua's appeal to the World Court, against Reagan's act of war in mining the harbors. As you know, the administration has said it will not recognize the world courts authority. I think never has it been so clear that Reagan is really an international bandit. And absolutely, he has declared himself outside world law. This is intolerable. And this is something we must and can do something about. So we are you sucker is preparing to petition Congress to have the United States recognize the courts authority, and at the same time, bring pressure on the court to accept the case. We're also thinking of sending a delegation to the Hague to back this up. So I just like to say to you, to urge you to send cables to the courts and cables to Congress, pushing for it for recognition of the Court's authority, and for the court to take the case. I think this is a crucial moment with mounting opposition, when we have here a chance to make this a world issue to bring tremendous pressure. And for those of you who are really interested in this first campaign, I'm going to speak up. There's even a meeting Wednesday night. We have very practical here is a meeting at the USAC office in New York City next Wednesday at 7pm to work on his whole World Court campaign. And that's at 208 West 13th Street. We think it's really crucial to go with this opposition now. And to take advantage of the very historical fact of This case coming before the World Court, this is something new, the American people have not in general been involved in this kind of thing. It's time to do so. Secondly, there's a lobbying campaign going on to oppose more military aid to the murderous regime of El Salvador and the countries. And I just want to urge people to lobby, personally lobby, your congressman over the Easter recess, which is from next Monday, until the 24th, you can get them at home. And in particular, to lobby members of the House conference committee, which will be considering the aid to El Salvador and the contrast, there are two New York State members of this committee, the conference committee and the Jack Kemp and Joseph Addabbo. Take it or leave it there anyway, they are on a committee, we need to keep up that pressure. And clearly, Reagan is all out to move ahead, willy nilly. But nevertheless, the issue is still in the house. And we can do something about it. And finally, I would like to invite all of you to an international conference on revolution and intervention in Central America, which is like us co sponsoring with other groups at the New School for Social Research on May 5. And this is another attempt to influence debate at a very critical moment.

Unknown Speaker  51:27
I think you know, I've been talking about stopping for isn't stopping very dreadful things from happening. There is another way though, I'd like to speak of it, which is that if we can stop this juggernaut of Reagan's militarism, it is not only the people of Central America, and particularly the women who will benefit here in the United States, very immediately the burden of a monstrous military budget, which has led to incredible cuts and services that we heard about earlier, but would be lifted. And in the longer run. We see in the revolutionary movements of Central America, the hope for basic social change in our own country. If the grip of empire loosens to the south, as it clearly has began to do, the door opens for the working people of our own land. Thus, we live in an hour of great danger, but also great hope, an hour of tremendous importance for women who have so long upheld this oppressive world economy. The women of Nicaragua, about whom I have spoken, are standing ready, and have been defending their country with their own lives. I think that women here in the United for us women here in the United States, we must heed our own call to combat Thank you. Before we

Unknown Speaker  53:18
begin, what will be a very abbreviated question and answer and discussion section I think 20 minutes is the most we can take. I'd like to introduce Jane Gould, my predecessor and the founder of the Barnard Women's Center and the founder of the scholar and feminist conference. And most of what's good that comes out of these conferences is due to the tradition she established. So stand up.

Unknown Speaker  53:53
We have two microphones here. You need not limit yourself to questions. But I would also like to hear from people in the individual forum about what they think transpired or what are the major issues. So on you will have to form lines in front of the two floor mics. And I'm really going to cut off discussion that 10 After five so that we can proceed to to the final portion, which is very much in keeping with the whole tradition of this conference. Let me also warn you, you're welcome to give your names but all of this is being recorded by WBI and will be played on Mother's Day. And if you feel uncomfortable about being recorded, perhaps you should speak at the reception or keep your name hidden or whatever you want to do to protect yourself but we can't get waivers from everybody so you are being recorded.

Unknown Speaker  55:01
I've had a very good time at this conference and I can Hello, can you hear me? Okay. Yeah, maybe you should turn it around and face right? Hello? Yeah. Okay. This has been a very good conference. And and I've enjoyed every one I've heard. And I can't think of anyone that I would like to have cut. But on the other hand, every one of these conferences I've ever been to before, had a balance between scholarship and activist. And this conference, I've heard nothing but activists. I haven't heard any scholarship. And I'm confused about that. I mean, I, you know, my work is in theory, and I come to this conference, because these conferences regularly because I like the interaction. I like the balance. And I like a positive visioning of myself as a theoretician at the front of the room. And I didn't have it this time, and it upset me.

Unknown Speaker  56:26
I asked this question, not only as a Jewish woman, but also as a lesbian. And I address it to barber Smith. What do you mean by saying that you have no problems with men when it is white men who create own and run this quote, imperialist war machine, unquote, not women, white or of color? I know that white women are oppressors, too. However, if you have problems with the imperialist war machine, you must have problems, at least with white men, if not with men of color.

Unknown Speaker  57:00
Here, Could everybody was everyone able to hear her? Okay. We question was

Unknown Speaker  57:10
what I said that I didn't have problems with man, I'm so glad you asked. Because the part of the sentence that I didn't quite, you know, include was what I had problems with his patriarchy, capitalism, racism, and sexual oppression, which means that I have problems with the systematic exploitation and oppression of people, not necessarily with the individuals, you know, who are the representatives, or the people who are carrying it out. I was also trying to speak about my position as a woman of color and a lesbian of color, who is in solidarity with not just a men of my race, but with all third world people, men, women and children for our liberation globally. So that's why I say I don't have problems with men. Because of that, if I only divide define my politics, and opposition to men, that means that I erase, you know, half of the population of people of color in the world.

Unknown Speaker  58:07
I'm going to make a brief statement describing the work of our workshop, which was on immigrants and refugees.

Unknown Speaker  58:19
Okay, I'm making a brief statement for our workshop, which was on immigrants and refugees. We heard from Sylvia Sandoval, who represents the Associazione Mohamed El Salvador, and who described some of the work that Salvador and women are doing here in New York and other cities of the United States, as well as in Salvador. And in countries like Nicaragua. They're very active raising funds, organizing women into productive associations, doing childcare or setting up childcare centers, etc. She is standing at the end here, there is a table if you want more information. We also heard from other Santini who is a labor lawyer, who works with the Center for Labor Relations at Rutgers University. One of the things she talked about was migrant farmworkers. Usually, when we think about migrant farmworkers, we think about the bottom of the occupational scale, she pointed out that within that stratum, you can bring in the gender variable and it turns out that women are even worse off than the men. We also heard from Anna Dubois who represented the Family Planning Council. She gave a minority perspective on the issue of family planning. And describe it as an issue of empowerment. It's not just a question of population control, nor is it a question simply of having as many babies as you want. It is a question of creating conditions within which the babies that you do want to have can raise to be fully enfranchised human beings. So sort of a reconceptualizing of the issue of family planning in terms of empowerment of people so that one of the things for example the organization is doing is voter registration among women. It is a very broad approach. Oh, finally, I would like to thank tema Kaplan for what was a wonderful conference. I agree with constants, that scholarship was not rampant. But at the same time, a lot of us come from the world of scholarship. And it is wonderful to hear a lot of the scholars on the panel, talk about activist issues. Thank you very much.

Unknown Speaker  1:00:28
I'm speaking for myself and a number of other people who met with me after the in between the speeches. On look, I'm concerned about one of the speeches made by Bernice Reagan. I know it's been a lot said about coalition and women of all different beliefs and groups getting together and orientations, we, you know, we should have a coalition. I agree with that, and that we should be a witness for each other. And I agree to that. But today I bore witness to something that infuriated me and made me very upset. I bore witness to a woman rationalizing an anti semitic remark by a man and women in the Audience applauding it. And that hurt me very deeply. And that's one thing I will not be a witness to and will not be silent.

Unknown Speaker  1:01:25
Yeah, one of the women earlier was talking about trying to raise the voter registration. And I think that if you take it from a practical point of view, I think a true democracy means that every single citizen of voting age votes. And I think that we can all agree that that's rather impractical, that the way you know, the way things are now, so I would invite to encourage people that if I think if, if everyone would try just once, not voting in the next presidential election, just see what happens. We already

Unknown Speaker  1:02:02
I think we tried that four years ago. As a middle aged white woman, I would like to state that I think racism is a white problem, basically. And I am ashamed that Ms. pivoine, who is an authority on discrimination should use the word niggardly several times, especially without defining it.

Unknown Speaker  1:02:36
I'm gonna report back just briefly on the comp on the workshop forum, that was held on feminism, anti racism in the peace movement, we managed to in a short space of time addressed the issues of the peace movement and of the anti racist and justice and freedom movement. From the position of peace camp activists, scholars were in there all over the place, I'm sure. from a position of mothers from the position of black women, we had women from the Medgar Evers College, and underneath, everything that was being spoken about was a real understanding that we all live in a time of real confusion. And for myself, the confusion which I'd like to dress to gray, so I sort of adopted some sort of mother she doesn't know that of course, but Sally talked about mothers and Grace's one is how do we all who I suppose we want peace eventually and we don't want the world to blow up and we don't want these animals to become eradicated or ourselves but we don't want what's going on now to be going on like it's going on now every minute of every day at all times. And so in for my own sake I talk about peace but I really want uproar and I really want less quiet and less sitting back and where does that put me

Unknown Speaker  1:04:01
right I mean, I don't think that's the I don't I don't even I would say anti militarism I wouldn't even say i i feel like you know that we need a lot of noise but I don't see I don't see the the difference, you know, in any way. If you're active and if you just just keep going and work every you're going to be in trouble. Don't worry about

Unknown Speaker  1:04:31
it. I have a question for Barbara Smith. Only because I think she might give me the kind of answer I couldn't give

Unknown Speaker  1:04:47
you