Unknown Speaker 00:01 Change in a particular incident that is you they are changing the structure of what is in fact a power structure by their presence and their activity as well come to you in a minute. But there was some body back unless this was immediately on this. Unknown Speaker 00:19 Yeah, it was just an immediate comment. Because the system is defining their status as minority, the system creates room within itself to place these four women are well, Unknown Speaker 00:29 first, it places them at the top, but that apply system as a minority, which it knows how to deal with better and a more human fashion. And after a while, maybe they'll be seen as normal, Unknown Speaker 00:40 but the system totally controls them and their movement and the potential they have. Unknown Speaker 00:46 Not after a while, you're insisting that we adhere to your construct, and your construct is a construct that adheres to the construct of the society. So I mean, I guess what I'm going to ask you. And what I would like to see in this room is for people to be sharing ideas about power, not necessarily addressing Okay, let's have Unknown Speaker 01:07 another comment, though your query, meaning you remain with the other people not being done. Unknown Speaker 01:17 My assumption of what you're saying is that you hold out that perhaps it will then be transformation of balance the governor's and I don't know whether we have historical reason or even contemporary reason to believe that that so I'd like to point to the Italian feminists and the Italian Italian feminism began within the authority structure, the traditional 40 structures. The men were not taking on women's process, the women were either to adjust to their process or leave, and they chose to leave and that then move women towards separatism. And I'm wondering whether, ultimately, are only successful the separatists as well, whether in fact, we will eventually be able to transform, I have not seen Unknown Speaker 02:10 a question on Einstein that indeed, you certainly have, historically speaking, records, a decision as well as an enforcement of moving toward separatism, for instance, and just loads more historical than that, but but the situation of English feminists during the 19th century was very much that they had to remove themselves from attempting to do anything. And now the structures that you've got separate girls schools and separate colleges, and you had a whole process in which women did not necessarily undertake an exploration of the situation of their selfhood. By themselves, I think it's entirely possible that we will have to do that. But I don't think we can lay out. And I didn't mean to, and I'm sorry, if I did, it was because I was trying to go back, that there is only one right way to do this, or or any one any one solution, I do think that these are the three powers that we can use, and we may have to use them in different situations in different way. On the same subject, I Unknown Speaker 03:21 think the problem that we had historically, has been that when the presence of women begins to make an impact, men separate out, my example is that women have been the same source of society and to a point men have before making their dirty joke before smoking, turn to the woman for permission. When that becomes oppressive, the men have gone to their men's clubs, to the men's dining rooms, and they have separated into their male structures. Now, the problem that we seem to be facing is, there are many places, despite laws of equal access, that men can go in the technol technological sphere into their own separate spaces, and totally ignore what it is that women have to say. So that feels that construct in the consent of the governed is unworkable. As long as men have the power to move on and off and to move into separate spheres. And women still don't have that power. We don't have spaces. We don't have the technology, we don't have the money so that our growth seems so bound and so limited, Unknown Speaker 04:34 one of the spheres the separate spheres in which men are totally alone. Unknown Speaker 04:38 Well, at this point, Unknown Speaker 04:41 which are important ones, I don't Unknown Speaker 04:43 mean institutions, even the academic institutions that are pro women or for women are very much governed by men. That's true, but they are not separate. They are not separated, but they have the possibility of becoming so I've written each one of these areas right now, I think that if women are involved in, in the corporation, if women are involved in academia in any area, it's because women have not yet become so much of a problem that men need to separate out. Men become separate is because women get in the way. Well, I Unknown Speaker 05:20 don't think you want to be Unknown Speaker 05:21 paranoid. Unknown Speaker 05:23 I think there. Certainly there are great tendencies toward this as being an instinctive No, I don't believe Sam find quick mail reaction. But I don't think it's the only reaction. And I do think that there are common human interests and that some men are intelligent enough to receive them and to watch women's talent and energy and intelligence, enough to like to accept some bargaining relationships, I think we can bargain more in different places, and harder than we have. Right now. Here, here, so what I skipped you before you go. Unknown Speaker 06:15 Just this isn't really what I want to say. Unknown Speaker 06:18 But just to pick up on your point. Unknown Speaker 06:20 There was a case a couple of years ago in New York City with a law firm of Sullivan and Cromwell, which is one of the most powerful law firms in the country had started to let a couple of young women in because they went to all kinds of pressure. And one young woman lawyer employee had to sue to get solid Sullivan and Cromwell to agree that not only would they go on recruiting, hiring and paying women from law schools on the same basis as the men, but they would cease having all of the firm's social functions in clubs from which women were prevented. So you know, to some extent that does happen, although I agree with you once or enough women, yeah, they change the system. But what I really wanted to say was, I throw out two thoughts. Because I've been dealing with the concept of power, in my work as a political scientist. And one of the things that made me start me thinking power was female groups, of which I am a member. And in which I discovered that everybody tried to stay away from power, that the groups had no focus, they had no nucleus, they have no center, because as soon as the woman became sufficiently assertive, to give the woman a center, she thought, Oh, my goodness, I'm grabbing for power. And she would treat it like mad. And I thought that that really picked up on a theme that runs throughout Western politics, which is that power is relationship between two people, but one of them is superior, and the other is inferior. And if we would substitute, I mean, since in the linguistic style that we've been using the sassy, if we would substitute for Power Word leadership, I think we might begin seeing or way clear to something new, because leadership is also a relationship between two people. But it means that the leader is being followed because the leader is answering needs of the follower. And once the leader stops answering the needs of the follower with follow, stop, following will no longer be a follower. And if it's certainly something we could use in American politics, but I think within women's groups, this is an idea as well. But there is nothing wrong with exercising leadership, as long as it is accountable, accountable in the sense of meeting the needs of the other people in the group, that that itself is not bad. And my second thought related to that is that it does seem to me that at this moment in American history, the only group that can be perceived as being anywhere on the left of the political spectrum that has the power to the coherence to organize effectively, this moment is women. If you look at what's going on in American politics, there is no other organized group on the left. And so the idea of politics is being a male domain. Yes, of course, it's dominated by men, but it's one that has to go on being dominated by men, I think is wrong. And the women's movement is proving it to be wrong. But I don't think the women's movement needs to become powerful in a male sense. While it's doing it, it can become a matter of leadership, a political movement in which leadership is exercised. I think maybe we should start thinking in those terms. Unknown Speaker 09:44 I don't mind whether we call it leaders and followers or rulers and ruled. But I think that the ability of followers to communicate their needs to want to call them leaders Unlike it stick will be effectuated by using the powers of the week. Otherwise, I think you're going to have the kind of leadership that that James McGregor burns describes in his book, which is a symbol which is synonym for pedagogy, you have a transforming leader who tells who sets the goals for his followers, naturally he and who raises them to their true worth and you know, gets them off the ground and all and all the energy comes out. And yeah. Unknown Speaker 10:34 So Unknown Speaker 10:35 that is what I think we want to be careful not to imagine as being a proper way of using power if he falls into it very fast, I'm sure that you don't intend to, but I think the effectiveness of the relationship remains in the hands. What is yes, a dyadic relationship, as of I think has to be as of now No, I don't know that will be in that future with we may be able to invent one of the things that we need to advance as a way not to polarize, we have been polarized on the basis of the division of labor by sex for as long as anybody remembers. The contest in the middle has preempted our sense of the unity of humankind around it once we can begin to to lay down the inevitable necessity of conflict and of solving problems by coming to decisions by debating and disputing them. We will be able to get more variety in into a group I do I do start where we are. Unknown Speaker 11:49 I found a conflict in what you were saying. Between the question you asked something about, it would seem that most reasonable men would want women and would be willing to bargain with them. And my question is going to be why? Because what that's in conflict with is the notion that men are in power and patriarchy exists because men don't want to give up power. And your answer about that seem to be open and women can rise. But we're talking about a society. And that's the basic concept. Why would they want to give up power? Now once I have to the external Unknown Speaker 12:25 world, some of them are sick of power that terrifies me, not all men are the same. Let us not homogenize Unknown Speaker 12:35 men who are in control of power now and we're saying something about how can we change this? And to say there were a few men who have different doesn't really address yourself to that conflict. And what you're all right. I think it Unknown Speaker 12:48 does. Let me say this. I said at the beginning that if the reality of power with total dominance and total submission, we wouldn't be living in the condition of 1984, forever in a day. If we had nothing but a patriarchal structure, in which all men not only aspire to power, but adored it, when they got it and beat yourself in the head. In order to enforce their wishes, I would agree with you. But that doesn't look at the world. It's not good. But it doesn't have that. And I think we have to explain why it isn't. Unknown Speaker 13:29 What is it? Why it isn't that bad? I don't understand, it seems that women are having a very hard time getting some power in the society. And the concept you're up against is something very large. And you see, but you weren't, Unknown Speaker 13:40 we're not having as much of a bad time as some women and other extreme conditions of patriarchy, where you cannot go out without a veil over your face where you cannot Unknown Speaker 13:54 stand with the point of comparison. I'm not I'm not trying to polarize, you don't say we're as bad off as I'm saying, in this society. It's very difficult for women to get ahead, because it is a patriarchal society, as you've said yourself, because men are not particularly interested in giving up power. And it seems that is something that you presented, that's what patriarchy means that that men are in control. And on the other hand, you seem to be surprised. I think it was extreme for women, for the women who mentioned something about the separatist nature of men, and that men are in control places where women can go and it's true for industry on the whole, and it's true religion, and those are places that men are making the rules and there aren't any way and allow. Unknown Speaker 14:39 When you started to make your point you spoke of the deal more extremely than you did when you finished that perhaps I spoke more extremely true. I certainly you're not just me and the value, separatist understanding in which women go or to investigate their situation, share it with each other and discover new ways to reach your purposes. On the other hand, what I was trying to say was that there already exists in the world as a situation, which is not as extreme as it would if there were nothing but patriarchal. Well, you're not in a good situation and patriarchy exists, but something else exists, which works to limit it. And I don't want to believe that it is simply the ethics and the morals of our leaders. To me, it seems to be fact that we who are the weaker member public relations, should still have sufficient power to modify the relationship. Unknown Speaker 16:05 Do you suggest we do that within a patriarchal structure, that kind of assumption there, and I think that's maybe Unknown Speaker 16:12 if we if we're going to do it at all, we start with a patriarchal structure, because that's what's there. I don't say we're going to end I particularly didn't want to say where I thought I did, I think say that wherever we want it to go, we were going to have to use to take me the powers that were naturally ours and easily available to us. Now like the bakery first Unknown Speaker 16:50 couple of points that you made already, one of them has to be said about leadership, I don't think Yeah, sure. I don't think that by exchanging the word leadership for power, we're going to accomplish anything. And I'd like to share with you a study that I did on leadership between men and women. In a task that involves forcing either either member of the dyad, two people together versus paired, male and female, and then female and female, same woman in two situations, okay. And in the situation, the couple the pair who didn't know each other, were forced to decide who was going to be the leader in a particular task. What we found was that the women were far less likely to assume leadership in the cross sex pair, then when they were paired with other women. And this was despite the fact that they were equally likely to make the decision, usual decision making conversation started like, like this, either the man or the woman saying what would you like to do, and even the man or the woman deciding, and equally likely, in both cases, that the man should be the leader? Okay, so the women had equal access to the leadership opportunities, but they gave them away. There was an interview situation in which they were going to then go into the site was killed guilty party of two suspects, test that Colin didn't, it didn't come from specific male or female abilities, it was an interview, they had to decide who was guilty of a suspected theft. And I think the crucial two points were that they were equally likely to make a decision, and the woman gave it away. And also, we did a personality test on these people. And we looked at dominance on the CPI, for those of you who know, the California Psychological inventory, and neither sex was more dominant than the other set. So it wasn't personality. And it wasn't decision making. It was apparently just the norm, that two young people and these were college age, people who didn't know each other, we're conforming to what everybody says they're supposed to do. It's nice. And it's the it's the right, quote, thing to do. And if you stick your neck out and say, No, you do the secretarial task, then you're doing precisely that you're sticking your neck out, and you're risking being different being rejected. And I think one of the points I'd like to pick up on, again, that you brought up was, but there is a price to assuming power. There is a cost to some power. It's risky, you stick your neck out, you risk failure, you risk assuming responsibility. And there's a lot of cost to power. And I think that many of us as women, either because we've been socialized to say, hey, it's easier not to assume this power, it's easier to let somebody else do it. Or because it's it's just the norm. Resist power and run away. Unknown Speaker 20:00 Do we also tend to think that it has to be immoral instead of just being ambiguous and abnormal? That's another question that affects everybody, I think mostly because of their socialization to carry the moral values of the culture. Now, you think you had your hand up for Unknown Speaker 20:23 a comment really, in relationship to what people were saying about the men separating themselves out afterwards, I was recently told about a study in which once women got into a field that was felt to be solely male oriented, male dominated more the power was held by the men, and they got into that field. And they, there was enough women in it, the prestige of that field fell off, and the power in that field sell off. Unknown Speaker 20:53 And I don't know what else people seem to be agreeing with Unknown Speaker 20:59 it. becomes a problem of how do isis women Unknown Speaker 21:16 become Unknown Speaker 21:17 a powerful force, if one was striving and fighting to get into a certain position, all of a sudden, it's the power is Unknown Speaker 21:30 suggesting is that this is a total situation. And I know that I began by saying within this system and starting where we are and doing what we can, but the more we talked about the practicalities of it, the more of what you're saying, and when other people becomes clear, that we can make progress. And we can change things and at the same time, because we can take with them actuation, the change will be affected by in one area will be affected by that. And another situation, I mean, they're just the same. I do not want to devalue or belittle the changes that are taking place. And that are take place they we haven't gotten there. Let me just give you an example from my job. 100 years ago, there were very few women writers. And it was it was quite odd to do this. There were some and they were beginning. But it was still difficult to make a living doing it. Well, after 200 years, we can make a living doing it. But how many of us won Pulitzer Prizes this year, for instance, and how many are taught or were taught and they are taught in the academic canon outside of women's studies. And other words, there are different sides and different aspects, even to a change, a growing ability of at least to live by your pen. If you're studying now. You're still not regarded as saying what's so important that you have to be taught as part of literature. But it is better to be able to live by your pen than not, I guess the question is will publish a woman themselves but watching a male editor picked up the woman's room and I've been in that position. There are a lot of women advocates in the publishing houses, but very few who control the money. That's right. That's right now back here who hasn't talked to you? Unknown Speaker 23:43 I'm the most worried about a power that nobody's mentioned today. And that's nuclear power, which was invented by man and which the men are lying about right left. And there are no women scientists to be able to read through the truth of what's going on. And it may be that all the things we're talking about are complete luxuries because if 20 or 30 years, nobody will be here. Why would you? Well, I like to see women mobilize and organize and using these three precepts that you gave to stop this as a part of the political process. Unknown Speaker 24:25 I don't see why they wouldn't find male allies there who was useful whether you want it to bond on other issues. Unknown Speaker 24:32 I haven't done any talking. I have not met a woman who was in favor of going on with nuclear. But there are loads of men that I talk to and I've read. I've read both sides, but I mean the man this is Unknown Speaker 24:51 obviously a field where Unknown Speaker 24:54 we can not only undertake this task that seems So it's vital. But we can also do something to which is to establish the insistence of women and feminists that what we care about are not women's issues. Unknown Speaker 25:17 And I'm sitting here thinking that one of the problems of the centralized power structure is that there's a weakness in the power, which is that not many men, and not many women are happy as they move up the ladder of the centralized power structure that exists. I'll just take that as a given that I was trying to think back to what Lisa brought up originally, early on in this segment, talking about the idea of fiber studio processing kind of a long range field things, it seems to me that one of the things we have to look at most closely is what kind of targets we want, and what kind of view we have with power. And the question also comes to mind is there such a thing as a decentralized power, whether it be how we're generating energy proponents or power generating changes in our lives, it seems to be one of the basic principles that the women's movement is charging, you're working with this whole idea of decentralization, and that, in some ways, has minimized our oppression view of the majority press, because we seem to be a bunch of people that disagree with each other, and contradict each other. There's lots of controversy and disagreement, and that immediately means that we're not together. That's a male definition, right? Because that's, that's women, we have to really work on the idea. I think that that trick of centralization and decentralization of viewpoints Unknown Speaker 26:46 were important point. The only time I've seen that strongly made and well made, incidentally, and anecdotally saying by a man, it's made by Gene Sharp and the politics of non violent action is talking about the effect. One of the strengths of a non violent political group is that it tends to decentralize rather than to centralize itself, partly in response to the need to to act in different locales and in different situations, but also, because it essentially undercuts the idea of a of a forceful leader, ruling by force. And challenge challenges, definitions of power. I'm not stating it well, but I did recall it at once you don't know that book, you might find it in yellow, let me see you haven't spoken Unknown Speaker 27:57 a number of things. I just kept getting back to the planning process. And what you raised earlier about new approaches to make, as someone who spent three years in Wall Street Law Firm said that, if you don't, even if you do mass numbers up to a dozen or 20, the changes on the ribbon are much more than the changes on the system, you don't change the system. And the only way you manage to stay there is to adopt the values. And, and in many ways, all the trappings of the system, because that's what makes you successful, and has nothing to do with being a woman. Now, it's true that you do gain some support back and forth on the other women. And you do manage to hold on to what he considers some things that are vital to your personal identity. But you managed, I think you have to give up an enormous amount of yourself to succeed, and someone that are going through that and will adopt the values and the trappings of the system they're trying to work out. But the fact that it doesn't change you is no impact is really enormous. Yeah. But I do think that women can Unknown Speaker 29:12 represent Unknown Speaker 29:13 can develop our own institutional problems. I just came from the National Women's Law conference, there were 1500 to 2000 that came together in Texas, and we've come up with different kinds of strategies and ways to work together to solve problems and joking about policy. We have enormous power and ourselves to do these things and we don't necessarily have to work for them structures that and that. It's it's a very significant way. Exercising. Unknown Speaker 29:51 I agree with you and I'm sorry. It was taught me not to. Not to sound too optimistic or speak too fast. have to remember that you are in fact illustrating the use of powers of the weak, disagreeing and descending from the way things are done and beginning to form groups which will confront the general disagreement with the structures, definitions and rules of workouts right, I Unknown Speaker 30:27 guess I'm suggesting is that the distress and the bonding are two important steps that can be action outside of the structure that Unknown Speaker 30:37 serves money that can be actioned anyplace. And undoubtedly the wealthy and the well being the creation of new settings, which may very well be single sex in our situation, or may very well be a kind of withdrawal of wax to a black power concept, and which I don't know enough about to do more than mentioned in passing. But certainly, we do know that this has been what has taken place, probably Well, again, and can be very strengthening, there are things that we desperately need to know that we can tell ourselves only when we're together. It's all it's all Unknown Speaker 31:20 out there, a lot of men are also battling power structures are very willing to cooperate in developing new strategies. Unknown Speaker 31:31 Yeah, yes, there are different areas and different levels, I think at which both of those things can take place, but they work best when they work together. Now, let me tell you, Unknown Speaker 31:43 it's how they work together. That's the crucial issue. We talked about polarization that we need to move towards the middle. I agree, but it's at what point we move toward the middle, that's crucial. I'd like to use women's studies as an example, because I do teach Women's Studies. And I feel that the strength women have academics has shown in planning Women's Studies is a good model for us, because that's when new forms of leadership were exercised. And practice taking practices is essential here. Because if we move toward that center, before with practice, we're going to be in trouble with it being co opted Unknown Speaker 32:22 again. And that's my concern. Unknown Speaker 32:26 In the university, we still remain a part, we remain a part as pros and some of us as departments. And we don't want to move too quickly toward that middle, because I think we're going to get lost again. And our strength has been in being separate. However, I don't suggest that as a permanent position, it's just not to move towards the center. And not to be too optimistic, or to be maybe unrealistic or not to see the illusions within some of this, what you say is progress. There are allusions in that process that we really have to look at. And but but there's certainly hope, I think we have all sorts of new novels that we've created that we can use, and that are powerful, especially since most the majority of the female student population in the 1980s in the university will be women. Unknown Speaker 33:29 Yes, I'd like to point out that this concept of bonding is certainly not confined to believe that has been a very powerful feature of the male power structure as long as history has been awkward in so she say that how many women were their exes? Is bonding with powerless, I think is really a polarization which is which is a disservice to everybody. And what troubles me about a lot of the conversation on earth is that something that's really a function of time and space, that is whether we do separate or together and is not an absolute, becomes a kind of excuse for polarization again, which is a feature of the old system. I think at this point in our lives. Wherever we are throughout the universe. The female principle has been brought into play as part of the cosmic evolution of the planet, because the male principle based on Newtonian mechanics and the separation of subject and object, and totally supposedly objective relationships, and this tiny the limited parameters of science have led us to a mindless technology which is like a pregnancy and he's on the verge of devouring this. So it was only through the introduction of the female principle which is concerned for process for the life force concern for values. And this is something that men are aware of tool that we're all in different stages in some men, some places are not just as some women, some places are not aware of female elements. But as a general evolutionary process, this is going on. And we need only join the parade. And I think we have to keep very clear that it doesn't mean we always have to decide, Well, are we feminist? Or are we scholars it's no longer need either or, but both pan. And we have to recognize that we can draw on the strengths that are now available to us in various parts of the world. We are now on spaceship Earth, it's very clear, everything we do everywhere affects us. But our conception of what the future is, will change the future. So in that sense, Lisa was right when she says we have to look ahead because your very intentionality defines what you discovered. Yes, but so I just want to mention one more thing. I have a friend Washington, who was the Assistant Secretary of Commerce, her name is Elsa Porter. And she is the only one who has ever had charge of the budget. Now, that's hard line stuff, no $9 billion 39,000 employers, and she has totally turned around the whole concept of that department about what they're doing. The government is for the people in it and not the reverse. Now, that sounds a very simple thing. But she's dealing with All right, Unknown Speaker 36:28 thank you. But what she has done is instituted human growth seminars, which will sound like, well, she can deal with her with her areas, she's dealing with human growth seminars. And the whole concept is not the hierarchical triangle where the leader or the ruler is at the top, and everybody else is on varying degrees of various various parts of the scale down below. But she is a facilitator at the center, the facilitator is at the center, and the other people have access to the entire process, and their place in it is respected and everybody's input is respected. You don't have to be at a certain point in order to be validated, which is also important. The old business, do you have to be successful in manager, you have to be successful in the old term? Well, you don't have to be anything anymore. If you can still have a structure, which will allow everybody to have an input, which can make the kind of organic change which will save us from lawyers. Sounds utopian. Concerned, except let's accept it. I'm still concerned about how we affect this. You're absolutely right. All I'm saying there are little sparks of hope you're proud of the State Department is so impressed by the results to GNC cheese, that they are sending people around, find out how she does. So I don't think we should feel that we're a beleaguered minority who have no support. And I believe that we, as Audrey Lord says, We have to explore our brains and then go out and find everybody else's dreams. Yes, well, I Unknown Speaker 38:17 think what we're talking about what you're talking about, this will not power. And she, as I said to you, just now she can cut the military budget, that she could really make a difference in our lives. I have found, for instance, that history is available to everybody that no class has ever given a power struggle. And I think we very optimistic about what happened in Iran. It seemed like people powerless people could take power, but it ends up with a kind of a bloodbath, because they have to destroy the class that they just put out. Now, it is true that the we do have powers and everything that we're doing is to strengthen our consciousness. But in the end, what is it? Do we take power? Do we share power, and nobody gives it away? And how do you get it? I think that the reason that women could get up in the corporation and there's a certain amount of democracy in America is because the class and power is a very strong class with very firm power and it could share to a very large extent, but when you get close to taking it away, your friends seminar is not going to show Unknown Speaker 39:19 you a question to the seminar, but what I'm saying is we have to link up with all the other people who also want reasons Yes, males and older, Unknown Speaker 39:34 submissive but to understand the difference between influence and power. When you talk about women writers, we have women writers, but they have not had the power to influence thought and movement. They have as you know, and Douglas said have had a really sentimentalize many instances and a to the party in power and class and power and the sex Unknown Speaker 39:56 somehow, somehow, actually Two things to change, first UNH perception. And then you change the way people apply those perceptions. And they will drive I would say that Rachel Carson, to do with changing perceptions, how we ought to deal with the physical environment that would agree John Jenkins has had an effective influence on how we think about urban problem. She was ignored for years, which, of course, Unknown Speaker 40:35 Rachel, and she was ignored for Unknown Speaker 40:38 years. But she was, you know, the New York around the whole damn thing. And it was picked up and discussed Wasn't she perceived, and then we began to have the beginning of the growth, nothing's gonna happen overnight on her volleyball, leadership. Unknown Speaker 40:54 The only very limited readership, but it Unknown Speaker 40:57 has influential people, if you want to use those words as among its readers. Unknown Speaker 41:07 Then that gets back to Kathy's question of who's the target, we want to reach out, I agree with you, Unknown Speaker 41:13 I think there may be a number of targets whom you want to reach depending on different situation, I don't typically have to say that there was only one target or only one goal or only one ideology. In fact, I think we began to lock ourselves into inflexible positions. If we think too Unknown Speaker 41:37 much room polarization is part of the process. You know, I don't see anything wrong with conflict, if we're trying to, to have to create a politic of power that doesn't have complicated, we're crazy, because conflict exists in life that exists and experience. I mean, we can't go through this, this whole thing of being nice to one another, because the world isn't nice that we live in. We're not nice as people all the time. And then we're in conflict internally the world's in conflict externally. And I think we have to build that into our power system Unknown Speaker 42:13 that power involves collective interest. Unknown Speaker 42:19 between different people with different ideas and different values, of course, you have, it seems to be there's no way to get around it. But there are ways in which you have what was being said this morning about things that cut across you have a also I think, a difference between conflict and polarization. Polarization carries it to extremes can become lethal can knock out any sense of humankind as an existing, we hope, continuing area and which which can change all of us. I do not know, turned away from the idea of conflict at all. But I do not think it is the only way in which decisions can be made. Nor do I think that that affects every situation in which a decision is going to be. It's Unknown Speaker 43:19 just very troubling to, first of all, take a few polarization. What do you feel the intensity of conflict, that's what any judge has to do, to become stronger, and to unbind yourself. They are bound terribly, we're bound by socialization, we're scared to death. We hide behind all the things we've been doing. And we've carried the book down it allowed me Unknown Speaker 43:47 to just trust and dissidents that sets up immediately in a situation in which we exert within our heads at least one sense of conflict with the structure. Yes, but let Unknown Speaker 44:01 me tell you, I don't have to fight for you. I'm embarrassed that I have to ask for, for independence that was declared by many years of Unknown Speaker 44:16 contact another 1000 years and we wait for the church by this time. I'm also embarrassed that I cannot be seated in my body, Unknown Speaker 44:28 whether it be expressively but with reference to reproduction or anything else. The men have an existing issue and the women are for very definite reason. To me, it's so basic when when my frame of mind, adoptions, I and my freedom that I've been promised to the Constitution and my freedom of the body, your job and promise we're not just made up. Isn't there The man has a perfect grip on so that when Lee Morgan gets out of this crazy thing, he gets out and he says, People who yesterday I saw on TV, well, how do you go within, he said, what I would say I was thrilled, because that's a feminine thing. So I should say, I'm gonna say, no excited when actually Unknown Speaker 45:26 you are not alone in your situation. And I think we have to dress like pretentious. Unknown Speaker 45:40 I just want to say, just getting off a little bit when I say that, that seems to be the power means as a term, whether it's male, female, feminine, non feminine, is not that much doesn't give me that much power, it seems to me is the capacity to get people to make decisions, concurrent with your own interests, number one. Number two, I think it's very important to distinguish between power and authority, they result in distinctions, you know, that there's a legitimate institutionalized structure, which may or may not have power, but power life also exists outside of the institutional structure. And so you've got a basic dichotomy between culture ideology on the one hand, and your structural reality, which is action, behavior, and whatever. On the other hand, and it is a confusion here I'm hearing integrate between Power Authority, legitimate, non legitimate. And when I talk about power, I talk almost exclusively about something that's illegitimate, until it moves into a central position in the society, when it becomes legitimized by meeting the people the people's interest, Unknown Speaker 46:53 you see, that we are in fact, in process of redefining these terms, which is something that we have to do, Unknown Speaker 46:59 right, which separates us maybe we knew, Unknown Speaker 47:03 by activity and redefining has been Unknown Speaker 47:08 a legitimate activity and has to be because if it were part of the institutional structure, we will be buying into the Unknown Speaker 47:16 system and control. You can do a legitimate things perfectly well within the structure and Unknown Speaker 47:23 how many decisions can you get to turn with your own interests by doing that? Unknown Speaker 47:28 If you're I don't know. But I think I don't, again, I'm I don't, I know in my own mind want to polarize within the structure on revolution against because I think the activity can be either or both and turn out to have an unintended larger effect than than just a lot of the time. I also think that there are many revolutions that perhaps the biggest ones which take place almost without our knowing, and which are based more on active intervention than on being thoroughly thought out ahead of time. So I'm just trying to keep an eye open, really not not to cut you back or you know, I think, Unknown Speaker 48:13 I think they're very important distinctions. Because we play around with the term power, we almost always confused with the authority, the structure, the government, and that's not really what powers that Unknown Speaker 48:24 I want to get, whether I'm doing it the right way, or not thinking about ourselves as possible participants and how to go about doing it. You know, how much time do we have? Derek Can we just Unknown Speaker 48:40 want to do that? When we get there at 20 Unknown Speaker 48:44 So let's get there at 25 Love and have 111 more sort of central comment. Unknown Speaker 48:51 All right. I'm concerned because we've been talking about the powerful and those who want power to Unknown Speaker 48:57 do