I { 'r- Septèmber 21,1978/4Ol T PEACE & FREEDOM THRUNONVIOLENT ACT'ON A PacÍfrst MÍssÍon to Moscow Hrst National No Nukes Conference ffi#Y#ffiffir HtrffiffiffiffiKääffiKÅffiK,ffiS #ffi wffiKäxeffi#ä&ffiK f TËäffi SäffiwffiFryS Ë" 1- LETTERS I recently read the July 20, 1978 WIN with the article on women in the military. I noted that in the last page ofthe article, Marie Valenzuela states that "witch hunts" for homosexuals aie used against women, bi¡t never against gay men. While I do not wish to fault the article. for it is otherwise a good explanation of mány of the problems of women in the Arnry, this statement about'the problems of gay men is simply wrong. I have. in working with CCCO Western Region, encountered numerous examples of "witch hunts" forgay men in all branches of the military. The pattern seems to be the same.: Someone is suspected ofbei¡g gay, or someone, afráid ofbeing caught and courtmartialêd, decides to confess in the hopes ofgetting a discharge, and then all hell breaks loose. That person is threatened to give names and promised a better discharge ifthey cooperate. Their friends, acquaintances, roommates, and cthers are questioned and threatened; the level of distrust among formér \ friends increases towhere everyone is suspicious. Eventually, a handful of people are discharged {fter a great deal ofunpleasantness for many people, and often people end up confessingtothings they nevei did, just hoping that investi- ' gators will Íinally be satisfied. It does happen to men, regularly. As indicated in the article, it happens to women, along with a lot more unpleasant problems. I was pleased to read the article and see some exposure ofthese problems. I simply didn't want people to getthe mistaken impression that gay men were somehow safe in the Army. _STEPIMNIIUSTON The articles in your August 17, 1978 issúe on mass trainsit are excellent. You have rendered a public service in the articles by Michael McFadden and Stephen Geisler. . _FRANKP.æDLER Mllwaukee, TÍlec. I see by your paper where you're having big party to "bring Abbie home." Let me say Ithink this is just dandy. No one ought to be und,erground except transmogrifying and willing roles. At the same time. May I indulge in a few reflections, to wit: Mary Moylan of. the Catonsville Nine has been mining and moling now since 1970. That, I suba mit, is a helluva big dose of dark. And 2 WIN Sept. 21, 1978 the charqes against her (l risk seeming odious) ãre soäewhat weightier to socìal change than drug dealing. She was accused and convicted. along with the rest ofus, for bqrning papers instead of children. Here goes nepotism. My friends ofJonah House, John Schuchardt. Ledon'Sheets, Ed Clark. Carl Kabat, and my brother Phil, are above ground indeed, but on i-ce in Allenwood. Their crime: impeding, however modestly. the meltdown of the planet. Now in these an'd related cases (Wilmington Ten, Marion Brothers, David Rice, et. al.) Iam setmusing. How cpme no campaign to bring such and such home? Let me push a bit further. Are we still hankering after counter-cultural personages iristead ofserious workers in the polluted vineyard? Are drug charges, however atrocious, more inspiring of rage and rêaction than the vengefulness that follows on serious political activity, and punishes handsomely? Please enIighten me. And please, I don't want to sit munching sour grapes in thatfamous vineyard. So here's a checkfor one for that big night. And please tell Abbie to tell us if he will, the difference between shooting up and sitting down. Notthat he did the first, but where has the second gone? Maybe he knows. God knows we need to know. . _DAìIBERRIGAN NewYorhrN.Y. I accept Susan Wilkins' invitation to respond to Jan Barry's article on peace- related legislation (WIN ó/29/78) and, , herquestions aboutit. There seems to be an implicit assump-' tion in Susan's piece that there is a lackof harmony between war tax resistance and \Yorld Peàce Tax Fund efforts. As a WTR and WPTF activist, I feel these are svmbiotic efforts which aid each other. If táx resistance were to grow rapidly, I believe the Congress would respond by enacting the WPTF bill or other legislation to piovide an alternative for taxpayers morally opposed to war. Large numbers of war tax resisters would clog the systern. The WPTFeffortaidsthe WTR movement in a couple of ways. It is raising consciousness about the dilemma of paying taxes for the military while believing that all war is morally wrong. I personally know sevèral \{PTF activists who, through their WPTF work, came to realiie that they òhould begin redirecting their own taxes now. The WPTF bill seeks government recognition of a right which already exists and should be exercised. The second way the WPTFbill helps the WTR movementis a matter of legitimization. Many people can understand the legitimacy of our resistance much better if they know we are also working for a legislative solution to our dilemma of conscience. Readers ofJan Barry's and Susan Wilkins' comments might jump to wrong conclusions about who would qualify for CO status under the WPTFbill. lt would not be limited to those recognized as COs liberal movement Deople who are Prolife. There are enliþhtèned thoughts re- presenting many women that can counterthat article. (A fine example - was under Selective Service, norwould recognition be similar to that under the Seleptive Service System. The key difference is in the burden ofproof. Under Selective Service, one had to prove that one was a CO. Underthe WPTFbill, one acquires CO recognition by checking a box on one's tax rèturn. CO tecognition could only be denied if the government could orove in court that one was not a CO. The shift in the burden of proof would make a world of difference, particularly helping the less articulate and those with nontraditional religious theletterin WIN 6/15/78byJo McGowan). How can abortion be winning "Peace and Freedom thru Nonviolent Action? " You in¡ult me as a woman if you really expect me to believe this is a nonviolent ptocedure. Again, just for the record, this woman does úot speak for me. Your article on "Alternative Health Care in a Rural Community" was outstandingl As a worker iir a skilled medical facility, I can document what a positive approach in the name ofpeace - thatarticleis., \{IN goodfor as long as I've been readine it. but recentlv it has iust heen stunniñgly so. By all nieans, Ëeep has been on doing what it is you are doing Co-author, Our Bodies, Ourselves WestSomerville, Mace. problem. I cannot correlate your theme of " Peace and Freedom thru Nonviolent Action" with radical feminist articles like "The Politics of Health Feminism" by Claudia Dreifus which support abortion. I have been very involved, vèry I am having a deeply, in the movement.for peace for a long time so your magazine does direçtly address itself to my interests. But this woman no more fepresents my thoughts than the man in the moonl It must have occured to some ofyou that there are I _ROBERTMITCHEIT i SanGabrlel, Callf. I I srouos. suCh as WRL, as well as eróu"os wiriinn forcivilandhumanrightiingenerat. - I I | _JACKSONMACLOW I I NewyorkrN.y. I /7g) Congressional I I I - and missing the A call in Congress fo¡the creation national peace academv mav verv vety impressed that ; Jim-a pacifist hero of mine for over 30 years-also thinks so. The importance of preserving and in- creasing the support given by local communities cannot be overestimated. Çivil disobedience ought only to be used when it has a good õhanceofbeins effective towârd thé ends sought and where its probable effects willnot be overbalanced by negative ones, such as, in the case ofSeabroók, the withdrawal - of communíty support. CD is a thoroughly polltlcal tactic, not merely a moral w-itnessing, and it was always used as such by G_ardhi. Americans and Europeans would do well to study once more- his use of CD. Too often it is undertaken romantiðally rather than appropriately. Gandhi waia nonviolent biii thòrouglily pragmatic polltlcel per3on, even though he never sacrificed principles for short-term (or even long-term) gãins. He was no romantiiist. . Forpersons such as my son and I, who cannot, at this time in our lives. eo to iail (and every person committing ôÞ müst be completely prepared to go to jail), the legal demonstration at Seabrook provided a welcome opportunity to võice our oppesition to nuclear power, as the Mobilization for Survîval did for us to voice our support for disarmament in general, as well as our opposition to both nuctear power and nuclear weapons and our support for civil and human rlghts. Legal rallies such as these are at lõast as important politically give many more people the opportunity to act nonviolently in support ôf their báiefs. '. of Susan Wilkins' finest ofa well I I as CD and I sarcasm-ex- ceptforonepoint.Whenmembersof Congress persist in raising this (over thejeers ofthe John Birch idea Societv and thejealous pride ofthe Pentagon)il think it warrants serious examination, Sept. | I I 1978/Yol. XIY , No.31 MirY Dru2ba": A pacif ist Mission to Moscow/ patrick Lacefield L The Stevens Boyeott: Turning the Tables on the Textile Ciant Joe Pilati &,David Dyson 16. First National No Nukes Conference / Murray Rosenblith I I I I 21 , 4. " I peacemoveswasangry,refreshing- point. CL'iJ:}L I all pacifÏst and anti-militarf Susan Wilkins' challenge (WINB/17 to my article on recent - i.¡ ì I anti-nuclearpowergroups,butalsoby 18. Changes 21 . Review,/ Sybi I Cl aibor ne that Cover: Photo by RogerManley, I posjible offer anything useful to the from Brown LungCotton Mill I B/ues, a history and songboók Susan is most angry, I suspect, be| of Southern míllworkers, ava¡lcause I reported a move toward a World ablethrough th¿ Southern lnPeace Tax Fund and failed to.write about I waftaxresistance. That'safine, stitute for Occupational Health I courageous program. It has won the ad- I miration of many IRS agents, I have been I told. But still the IRS agents persist in I Susdn Bcadle o Patrick Laccfield following orders. Michael Lardner r Lauri Lorvell As it happens, I spoke_with one IRS agentwhosuggestedhowtochange lvlurray Rosenblith their orders which are made in Washiirgton by ordinary men and women. So I 5Ol Atl¡ntic Avc./5th ftoor mentioned that, in an aside, while re| porting some small moves for peace I Srmllyn, NYl1217 inchingthroughCongress.Iampleased I lólcplronc: (212) 62æ137, õla{Sg5 thatSusansawit. I Ifmore people refused to pay taxes, UNINDICTED somebody in Washington would have to I CO.CONSPIRATORS listen, exactly as Susan argues. And in| deed, if I read California's tax revolt I clearly, millions of Americans recently I rather than a knee-jerk reaction people"lesspure"thanourselvêscanit The positions voiced in Douglas Wilson's and Jim Peck's letters (WIN 8/10/18) arevery well taken. Even ifthe Çlam's Coordinating Conrmittee did not follow the usual consensus procedures this time, its decision was a-wise one. I'm "People's Resource Guide to ESTIIERR.ROME -IvtrCF.ELIrf Sehoharte,\Y. a I disobedience, and 3) massive legal rallies." This strategy shouldbð adopted not only by the CIam and other be"naivè," "hypocritícal"'andivorthv BIttSAMT]EL 1978). FI¡üN . Fatte Church, Vo. Health Politics" (WIN, 7 /27 /78 E 8/3/78), two corrections should be made. There is a more recent edition of Our Bodles¡ Ourselves, by the Boston Womeh's Health Book Collective. Itwas published in 197ó and costs $4.95. It is considerably longer and changed from the 1973 edition. Also please note that any health treatment or counseling group that has an IRS tax exempt number can order twelve or rtrore books directly from Simon and Shuster at $1.20 per book, plus postage. See the clinic äiscount bbx on the copyright page of Our Bodles, Ourselvee for more details. Any group not able to qualify for this discount or unable to affordto buy books can write directly to the Boston Women's Health Book Collective for a subsidv. An iinportant omission under "Occuoational Safetv and Health" is Jeanne Stellman's neiv book, Womento TÍorkr' Women's Ilealth (Pantheon Books, andregional clusters, 2)large-scafecivil . views. I would further like to say that I have been disappointed by how little WTR news has bêen in WIN in recent months. Unless they, read Poacemaket and/ or God and C¡esar, WIN readers áre probably unaware how much WTR ãctivity there is. I hope WIN will'find a wav to cover waf tax resistance mofe fulíy in the future. In the Wilson's ,I thoroughly approve of I âdvocaqy sf'ra three-pronsed stratesv: I 1) local ãctivity plannêd by-affinity gíóups I I I I I I I I refusõdtopaymuchoftheirtaxes, throughareferendum.Ithinkpeace- workers might learnlsomething from that, aswell. Oristhereonlvonewavto . peace? (Sorry, A.J. Mustel) _JANBANRY N.J. I wonder ifvou could suesest to the oeople who tieã 408 black rilõons to a rópe (the length of the Trident) that nexttime they reconsidertheir svmbolism. I'd suggest 408 piecés ofbarbed wire dippedinbattleshipgreypaint,tied around a tong wtre, Not only is black beautift¡I, but oldfashioned rope, with its many short fibers making, bytheirtightfriction, a long strength, is a nice symbol of human soclety. KeepuptheElFprotest. Montclalr, PETESEEGER j B"*onrN.Y. I | I I Forcst o LarryCard. r ¡ohn Low. I I I | I I 'lvl¡mbcr ol WlNEditori¡l Board I I I I I I I I I I I I WlN ii pr¡btichcd cvcry Thwrday ercept frr thc firsr nrck ln l¡nurry, the ftiurrh weeÍ in M¡rch, thc ¡ecrnd wc* in lunc, thc l¡¡t t*n seck¡ in Aut¡¡¡t. rhefirlnwo n¿Çl¡ in Scprcmbcr ¡nd rhe l¡st wcil iñ Occqnbcr by W.l.N. Me¡ezinc,' lnc, wirh tho sl¡pgofl otlhcrwar Rc3¡3tcf3 Le¡8ue. $¡bs(fi¡rt¡on3 tll pcr ycti. Scond clers posrrre p.id .t Nclv Yoú,, NV 1ûþ1 rnd rdd¡tiÐal meilinr olficc¡. lneec dividu¡l writer¡ ¡æ rc¡ænsiblc for ôinkn¡ e¡pcs¡cd ¡nd ¡ccurry of l¡ds ¡ivcn. 9rrr1-¡¡-r!c7¡pl¡ cañnot ba ralünad unh33 tdrrn¡dnicd bv ¡ ¡cll;rddrc¡¡rd, ¡tmpcd onvrkrric. hl¡tldhUSA Sept,21, 1978W1N3 'm notoutto savetheworld," explained 33 Bernie, middle-aged insurance salesman f , bound for Kiev to visit relative s and fellow pas- sengerón Aeroflotflight36l from NewYorkto Moscow. "Let me giveyou some advice-don't get involved in anything political while you're in the Soviet Union. You'llonly stick.yourfoot in it." I nodded and f lashed the sort of knowing sm ile one possesses when.one has something other than tourism in mind. My six colleagues and I were bound for Moscow for an explicitly politiçal reason: to take our disarmament protest to Red Square and the Soviet government, a project that truly promised, in Bernie's words, to "putourfoot in it.' ' Some báckground is helpful in understanding both the logistics and the politics of our mission. The idea sprang, not quite f ully grown, from the head of Scott Herrick, a member of the War Resisters League nationalcommittee and a participant in the 1961 San Francisco-to-Moscow Walk which marched through 600 miles of Sovietterritoryto hold atwo hourvigil.in Red Squarewith ttìe permission of the Soviet government. Scott, pained as we all were bythequantum leap in thèarms race since that time, suggested that the WRL drive home the message of unilateral initiatives toward disarmament by mounting simultaneous demonstrations in Red Square and atthe White House in Washington, DC. ,t The original plan called for ten pa¡ticipants to enter the Soviet Union on tourist visas for a twoweek tour of Moscow, Leningrad, and Kiev. As the time neared, several people wêre forced to withdraw due to job or family obli gations, leavi ng seven WRLers: nationalcommittee members J erry Coffin of New York City, Scott Herrick of Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, and Craig Simpson of Albuquerque, New Mexico; WRL staffers David McReynolds of New Yoi"k City and Steve Sumerford of Chapel H i ll, North Carolina; WRL chairwoman Norma Becker of New York City and myself . That Norma was the only woman in the Moscow contingent was a disappointment for us all and cannot be justif ied, though in all fairness it should be said that other women had been solicited to participate but for various reasons were unable or unwillin! to make the trip. ln arranging thetourand applying forvisas, we were forced to set aside our usual principle of openness, presenting ourselves aspeople active in the anti-war movementwho very much wished to tour the Soviet Un ion. Since several of our number had either signed statements or spoken publicly in support of Soviet dissidents, there was some uncertainty up to the last moment as to whether one or another of us might be denied entry and trip up the entire group. Fortunately, we received word of the apprpval of all our visas a week before we were scheduled to depart. "Tell lt To The Russians" Or Something More? deploy such new weapons systems as the cruise m issile, Trident submarine and possi{y the M-X missileand neutron bomb. Whythen didwefeel the need to take our disarmament message to the Soviets? Bêcause the arms race has escalated to the point where assessing the blame ceases to be a useful exercise. ln their quest for paritywith the US, the Soviet Union has acceptêd the American ground rules and illogic that have brought the globe perilously close to nuclear war. The Soviet Union has eschewed any bold dis- armament initiatives and opted instead, likethe US, to place its faith in SALT and the Mutuai Balanced Force Reduction talks, bilateralefforts that show little promise of slowing much less halting the runaway arms race and may well serve to institutionalize it. Part of this joint US-Soviet strategy involved-stonewalling the Third World demands for substantial disarmament initiatives at the recentlyconcluded UN Special Session on Disarmament. The Soviet Union acted positively in launching a propaganda campaign against the neutron bomb (wh ich Carter delayed less because of ''clever Soviet propaganda" than as a result of mass oppo- sition across the political spectrum i¡r Western Europe and the US). Yet for all his denunciations of the bomb as a horrible inhumane weapon, Brezhnev left no doubt that the Soviet Union would produce and deploy the neutron bomb should President Carter give it the Cr:een light. Sending A Message From Moscow Was our demonstration in Moscow simply adesire to quiet our critics on the right who demand on each and every issue that we "tell it to the Russians" ? Simple though that reasoning may be, it is not suff icient to justify the þroject politically and morally. American pacif ists have "told it to the Russians" on a number of occasions both in Moscow (with the 1961 walk and the'l9ti8 War Resisters lnternational protests against the invasion of Czechoslovakia) and at the Soviet embassy and consulates in this country, No doubt this project could bestow an aura of credibility on the movement, but to undertake a demonstration in Moscow merely to make domestic political hay would be the worst sort of political \ opportunism and anti-Sovietism. More penetrating reasoning rests in an examination of the arms race itself and each of the superpowers' role in it. The leaf let prepared for distribution in RedSquare said itwell: "We realize thatas Americans our main emphasis must be on the United States, which initiated the nuclear arms race and is theonly nation everto unleash nuclear weaponryon felkjw human beings." Yes, the United States has a two to one advantage in numbers of warheads, a five year lead in mostweapons research and development, and is preparing to A Soviet plainclothes policeman jumps Steve Sumerford as he hands out leaflets (center, w¡th beard) in Red Square with St. Basil's Cathedral and the Kremlin in the backgroúnd. At i¡ght, another póticmair uses an umbrella to knock down a Western reporter's camera. This is the only photo of the 20-second disarmament demonstratlon ( largely off-camera to the left). Photo by United Press lnternat¡onal. 4WlN Sept.21,1978 Patrick Lacef ield was an organize:r of the September 4 Moscow-Washington demonstration and is a member isl theWtN stafÍ. The f írst hurdle we faced upon landing was customs. Fortunately for us, the Soviet customs inspectors seemed less concerned with what a group of Americaír tourists might be carrying into the country than with rummaging through the bags of Soviet citizens returning from travel abroad. We were met by our lntourist guide, Natasha, a pleasant, dark-haired MuscoVite, and whisked by bus to our lodgings at the Hotel National, built in 1902in the ornate style of a Russia long since past. lri the several days that followed, we played the role of eager tourists, shutterbugging everything in sight and complaining about the starchy Russian food. We soaked up more than a little of the Moscow scene: the Kr:emlin with its three cathedrals, seat of government, golden copules and czarist treasures; a colorful folk singing and dancing group at Tchaikovsky Theatre; a panoramicviewof the cityfrom Lenin Hills where dozens of newlywed couples gathered to pose for pictures; and the CUM deþartment store, crowded with Russians vying for consumer goods, Statues of Lenin and, to a lesser degree, Marx and Engels, were much in evidence in this first socialist state and yet the Marx-Engels Museum was empty of visitors save our group while the museum of Western art next door drew huge crowds. According to Natasha, Communists ih the Soviet Union had "all obligations and no advantages," but only Sept. 21.1978 WIN 5 I Westerners and a privileged few Party bureaucrats were'allowed entrance to the special shop at the ' Russo Hotel. All of the accomplishments and contradictions that are the Soviet Union loomed large for all to see añd draw conclusions f rom. J erry Coff in contacted the Moscow foreign correspondents about the ãction, scribbling answers to their questions in homes and off ices presumed to be bugged. When we met the çvening before the action at the bar in the lntourist Hotel, Rolling Stones musiô blaring loudly in the background, we learned the correspondents thought it likely that we would be detained for some time. Onethoughtwemightbeheldtoexchangefortwo I l' Russian ÚN employees being held for espionage in New York; another pointed to the tension surrounding the trial of American businessman Francis Crawford on currency violations scheduled for September 5, while another predicted a quick expuf sion. ln the end, of course, they were all wrong but we steeled ourselves for the worst. As the Krem lin tower clock sounded the hour of f ive on Monday, September 4, I stood in lront of the GUM departmônt siore off Red Square with David and Cr:aii, waiting for the others and feeling as conspictõus as hðtl. The sky was dark and olercast and ä slieht drizzle began to fall on the red cobble- ingatheied "u¡tion "?;*iËf in the center of the sqúarà, a much U"ttu.îrinãLìthan *è had expected and þossibly responsible for whatseemedtóbeheavier-than-uiualiecuritvin the Square. At three m in utes past five, the rest of the group stonesoithe Square. Ñearlyadozen journalists, ;Í;¡i"g arr ved and \ .ur1r".ur"n,îad leaf lets wh ich I concealed in a copy of tl.re Coq-. munist Party-USA newspaper The Daily World. We stepped into the Square. At the given signal, j erry wh ipped the banner out of h is carrying b,ag and Norma, David and Scott stretched it out wh ile Craig, Steve, and I began to distribute leaf lets; lmmediately a ilamor arose as militia, plainclothes detectives, and KCB agents converged on the banner, slashing it in two with a knife and trying to yank it fr:om the four holding it. Soviet police nabbed Steve before he could toss his leaf lets into the air and grabbed Craig, who was ldaf letting the crowd on hand to watch the changing of fhe guard atLenin'stomb. Shoutsof "miry druzba" -peace and friendsh ip - rang out across,the Square as the Soviet police sought to interfere with Western photographers and cameramen. Having given away two leaflets in four attempts, I turned to see thé banner ripped to shreds after only 20 seconds and immediately threw my leaf lets h igh into the air where a gust of wind caught them and blew them across the Square, Soviet police in hot pursuit. I wasseized at once by four young militiamen in light green uniforms. One arm painf ully twisted beh ind my b¿ck,.l was shoved 20 yards o.r so and into a poliée car. ln short order Steve was thrown.in on top of me as.was a CBS News camerarhan yelling "help" and "correspondent, correspondent" to no avail. The car then shot across Red Square and down an'alley'to pôlice headquarters. At the front desk, we antq-ed up our pass- Tribune and six British tourists (allegedly CP members) swept up after picking up a leaf let. J erry and I chatted in the doorway with the CBS News cameraman who overheard the police commenting that our leaf let "says some good things. " ,{fter less than an hour in custody, we were handed our passports and shown the door. Somewhere in the Soviet chain of command, a decision had been made, aconscious political decision, not to come down hard on us. lndeed,'we soon discovered we would even be allowèd to contin ue our tour. Suprised at this, the one contingency we had not planned for, we returned to the hotel to join our compatriots who had not been arrested, That evening, whileour ll comrades in Washington' were in jail where they would re¡¡ain for 30 hours more, we wined and dined at Arbbt Restaurant, one of Moscow's f inest, ref lecting on the irony of the situation and feeling no small discomfort. With The Soviet Peace Committee... The next morning, presumably as a resultof our action, the Soviet Peace Cômmittee requested a meeting with us. The Peace Committeeoff ices, f urnished in marble and cloaked iñ exquisite draperies, resemble anything but yourordinary peace movement offices. For nearly three hours, our group held discussions on disarmament with a top-level delegation that included Michail Kotov, Executive Secretaryof the Soviet Peace Cömmittee; Vikenty Matzeen, a top political writer for the Party newspaper /zvestia; andAlexander Dazydov, Directorof the US-Canada lnstituteand a leading Soviet disarmament expert. For their part, the portsandwereseparated, lwascoirsignedtosit and waiton an old church pew in a small detention room. Later J erry and Craig were brought in along steve'"'""lü:,:iiJfiif*i#"î,,ïi#i**'îi,*å;#jli,:"3"+:i*Ji'i, Karl BissinBer. ffi"Ëffit*,,ff*i1*lí,ärr,, Soviets sought to convince us of the Russian people's yearn ing for peace and of the eff icacy of Soviet disarmament proposals. Of the first we had no doubt-the devastation and death wrought by the Second World War has so sensitized the Russian people to war that they treasure pèace above all else. ln Byelorussia, oneof the Soviet republics, stands a memorial divided into four parts. Three of the section s bear vegetation , the fourth is kept barren, a stark reminder:thatone quarterof all Byelorussian s perished between 1941-45. ln response to the Soviet support of SALT,.we counterposed un i lateral i n itiatives ; two'i n particular. The first was a unilateral haltto all.nuclear testing, negotiations for a bilateraltest ban having foundered on the rocks of resistance from J ames Schlesinger and the US Defense Departmãnt. Our second proposal would involve a unilateral Soviet declaration that it had reached parity with the US and halt all Soviet production of nuclear weapons. Our proposals touched off a serious exchange of views during which the Soviets aired their anxieties about the possi bi I ity of a US-Chi na-J apan al I iance directed against them. Like the US government, the Sovietq emphasized the need to negotiate f rom strength, not weakness. "Theonlythiñg that imperialism will understand is strength," said Dazydov, admitting quite f ranklythat the Soviet Union is laying plans to increase military expenditures should SALT fail. "l respect your publication," Dazydov stated f irmly, pointing at me and referring'to WlN, "but you are not the equal of the New York fimes. We respect your movement. You may$e in the most d¡ffi- Continuedon p.17. Washington protestors unf url banner in front of the Whitê House. From left: Van Zwisohn, Crace Palei, Ralph DiCia, Cathy Carson, Cail Bederman, Wairen Hoskins, Ed Hedemann, Karen Malpede, and Glen Pontier. Also arrested, but not p¡ctured, are Linnea Capps Lacefield and Karl Bissinger. Photo by Karl Bissinger, ¡ i I t tl F I t t! il i ir 6WlN Sept.21,1978 Sept, 21, 1978 WIN 7 t' ; Roanoke Rapids, where Louis and'hundreds oú. other Stevens workers saw to it thatthe union won a representation election four years ago. Butthere is stíll no contract in Roanoke Rapids, nor anyw-here else in the far-f lung Stevens empire (83 plants, 63 óf them in North and South Cärolina). Thecompany's intransigent opposition to the union is, in iact, what made the boycott both a political and moral imPerat!ve' Louis Harrell, posterfrom theCarolinaBrown Lung Association Allin . ,, i'. ,l . ,:.1 ,.'ì I ,:l i,,i I , \ t TIüSTEYENSBOYCOTT: ä TT]RNING TIM TABTES ON TIM TEXTITE GIANT H. ffil ti bY Joe The Legacy of Louis í:i .l ¡, !ll 'ì :.,: '''' l i. ¡ Harell Byssinosis takes your breath away-and whgn Louis Harrellwas buried in Roanoke Rapids, North Carolina, on J une'19, the dreaded "brown lung" disease had claimed another victirn. Louis Harrell had worked for J .P. Stevens and Co., the nation's second largesttextilefirm, foral- most40years. His photograph-taken as he emerged from the cotton mill, his clothes covered witÉ clïust and lint-had appeared on awidely circulated poster for the Caroliria Brown Lung Associa- tion, àn organization thatcame into being largely because J .P. Stevéns and othertextile companies denied fór decades the very existence of byssiJoe Pi lati and David Dyson aremembersof the J,P, Stevens boycott staff of the Amalgamated Clothing and Texti le Wor kers U nion in New YorkCity Pilati and David Dyson nosis-the respirato¡y disease caused by the inhalation of cotton dust-and foughtclaims for compensation at everY turn. When Louis Harrell died, he was still waiting for his own workers' compensation claim to be settled' "l started in the mills when I was 13 and I been workin'there ever si¡ce," Louis had said in the film, festimony, produced bythe Amalgamated Clóthing and Textile Workers Union to promote the consumer boycott of J .P. Stevens products. "Been havin' a breathin' problem for quite awhile' And it got so everytime I went in there [to work], I near stifled to death. Finally the doctor told rne I couldn't go backthere no mQre. I just hadto guit." Othèrthan passageof the legislation pending in Congress to compensate brown lung victims, spoñsored by South Carolina Senator'Ernest Hollings, there could probably be no more f itting memorialto Louis Harrellthan a union contract in The Family ln 1813, when Captain Nat Stevens converted his father's New England grist mill into a woolen mi I l, he could hárdly have anticipated what he was start¡ng. What he did know was that the War of 1812 had given him just the chance he needed, The War with Britain created a ne%d for domestically' manufactured wool cloth and business boomeij. But with the peace, British woolen goods f looded the market. Many mills that did not react quickly enoúgh went under, but not CapJ. Nat's. He switched to ff annel production, bought out his partners a.nd soon owned stock in a gunpowder factory, banks, insurance companies, mills, railroads, and water power associations. Of the morethan 100 families who started woolen mills in the US be-. tween 1800and 1815, the Stevenses arethe sole rsurvivors in the industry. From its inception, the managementof J .P. Stevens has passed from fatherto son in a direqt I ine. But fam i ly relations were not always har: monious, as the'Stevens empire preyed upon relatives as well as oûtside competitors. f n 1833, Ezekil¡l Hale, J r., Nat Stevens' cousin, purch ased a woolen,m i I I i n Haverh i I l, Massach usetts, from his father. ln 1839 his son, Ezekiel James Madison Hale, known as E.J .M., was made a partner. Four years later, Ezekiel.J r. bècame convinced that J esus Chri st would return to e4rth i n Decemberof 1843 änd hastenedto prepare. E.J .M. advised him that Cod would look more.favorably upon him if hedidn'town awoolen mill. Heagreed and sold it to his son for $20,000. By f 845, Ezekiel J r. had becoine impatient waiting for the world.to ehd. He wantéd his mill back. E.J .M. refused and father and son wentto court. Capt. Nat Stevens stepped in and convinced the court that the mill was worth $30,000 (other witnesses ref used to value it over $20,000) and Ezekiel J r. won back his interest. But'Nat Stevens was not ouf of the picture. The ownership f urcir left the mill in f inancial:trouble. The Hales were forced to sign a mortgage, and didn't knowthat Capt. Nat h.ad secretly purchased thp mortgage frorñ the brokðr. When Ezekiel could not meetthe first payment, Nat Stevens foreclosed. An auction sale was held outside the m ill . Be- ' sides the Hales, Moses end Ceorge Stevens, Nat's sons, were present) Ezekiel and E.J .M. were ,determined notto losethe mill to Nat Stevens, so they spent alltheir timewatching Moses and' Ceorge. lt proved to be a bad move. Bythetimethe auctioneer had the price up to $25,000, only a littlenoticed stranger was left bidding. He was Capt.. Nat's trusted.forernan and the Hales were finished, That was in 1855. This adroit maneuver by Capt. Natmarked the beginning of an expansionary period in which he accumulated suff icient capital to weafher the financial panics ofihe raobs and make a grand killing off the Civil War. ln 1899 a grandson of Capt. Nat formed a partnership, the J .P. Stevens Co., to expand into merchandising. From 1906 on, they expanded to the South, once more beating competitors to the punch. Robert Stevens, Capt. Nat's great-grandson, Was appointed a colonel during World War ll and served as Deputy Directorof Purchases in charge of fedeial contracts worth tens of millions of dollars. With this kind of help, the company secured over $$0 m i I I ion in contracts during the war. At the war's end, all Stevens woolen and worsted manufacturing was moved from New England to the South. The reasons: "Old buildings...high costs... and union3." t Tt il' ñl'rr rrç1 11ì ¡¡ 'i a t&¡l* ?- a \ ¡ 'Tv ln the. early dàys the text¡ le compan ies reaped h uge profits by explo¡ting child labor. Photo f róm Brown Lung Cotton Mill Blues, "Goons and Ginks and Company Finks" The Southern textile industry is America's last unorganized manufacturing industry, with only 10% of its worker5 organized. Textile workers are the lowest-pai d. i ndustrlal workers i n the nation. The hostilityof thetextile industry has played a considerable part in keeping the workers unorgqnized. That hosti I ity extends beyond the wal I s of ihe mi ll. Last year Thei ma Swann, a former Darl i ngton mill worker, described what happened during an organizing attempt in a milltown at public hearings on the Labor Làw Reform Bill before the House Subcommittee on Labor-Management Relations. Shetoldthe Subcommitteethat if one pe¡son was pro-union, all the other family members were laid off . Children were pressured at school by their teachers to oppose the union, churches made'their appeal for the sake of "community peace," and neighbor was set against neighbor. Sept.21,1928WlN 9 SWlN Sept.21,1978 {, tion process and récognized the union as the bargaining agent without requiring another election. Still, courageous Southern workers began to organ ize despite Stevens' insistence that 1'the unlons had caused the closing of the mills in the North.'"1 The compan y "line" was vividly Butthequestfor'acontractwasfutile. l reinforced bytheclosingof the Hockanum, MA, workers. t became clear that the National Labor Relations Act would be ineffective in the face of recalcitrant and del i beraie obstruction by the texti le i ndu stry. Union organizers knew they couldn't take on the whole South, sô they resurrected an old labor tactic: target one comPanY. Burlington Mills, the largest textile company, was considered. Although they had fought unions 60s' i nrthe 40s, they were partial ly union ized by the a historyof had a hand, J .P. Stevehs, on theother had estab' but England in'New iew,union'contracts lished a$oufher:n headquarters ín Creenville, SC, where several other industries had been recently organized. the Stevens workers were eager and askiñgfor help, I n 1 963 , the Texti le Workers U n ion of America (TWUA) began concentrating on J .P. Stevens dnd sentorganizers to 21 plants. The company's responie was swift and harsh. Workers who sympathized with the trnion were f ired oh the spot. The äction resûlted in a court case now known as Stevens l, thefirstof a.long lineof cases, manyof which are still unsettled. Eventually, the TWUA proved in courtthat 71 workers had been f ired illegally in2l plants simply because they wanted to join a union and had encouraged others to dothe sa¡F9. Many more had been fired, but these 71 cases could be proven. The Supreme Court decided the case in Deqember 1967 infavor.of the 71 workers and ordered them reinstated. But before the litigation was completed; the second round of f irings had begun. This time, the victims were the workers who had testif ied in m ã \ tr fl tr # t ä t iI I i n 1949, I ayingoff 1, 300 I Stevens l. The NLRB wentto courton 14 more occasions to try to restrain Stevens f rom the intimidation campaign, but the early organizing efforts were stalled by stitt more company-inspired fear tactics ' Between 1963 and 1976, Stevens was found guilty of more violations of the National Labor Rela- tions Act than any other company in the nation's history. The violations were so numerous that .ánv *".ã.;bi;;¡1" oìder to expedite legal p'rocessing, resulting in 15 guilty deciiions bythe Board. J .P. Stevens was forced to pay more than $1 .3.miil ion in back pay to workers who were illegally f ired or discrimipated against. By the late 1960s, the workers in the Statesboro, Ceorgia, plant had had enough. They asked for a repre-seniation vote. The maþrity of them had signed union cards, but management haiassment beJore the election reached such a fever pitch that hundreds of workers feared voting for the union. The NLRB concluded in 1969 that Stevens' managers had f lagrantly tampered with the elec, Ii, : { : : 10wlN Sept.21, 1978 Stevens \ simply ignored the union-and when the union wouldn't die, they made good their threats !o the workers ànd closed the plant in1975. ' The NLRB had gone to court in the Statesboro case. ln 1971, Stevenswasorderedtobargain in good faith..By 1975, Stevens was held in contempt for failing to do so. On appeal, the decision against Stevens was aff irmedinlgT6bythe Fifth Circuit, but it made no difference: the judges were talking l about "remedies" in an emPtY Plánt. Meanwhile, in another part of the South, a majority of the 3,400 Stevens workers in seven Roanoke Rapids, NC, plants f inally overcame the intimidation and voted fqrthe union. Butthese wqrkers soon found themselves in the same state of limbo as the Statesboro workers. Tothis day, the company engages only in " surf ace" bargaining; . otherwise it ácts as if the union doesn't exist. Work iul"i ânã-*uÀ" scales are changed arbitrarily without so much as a nod to the union' Hangìing over it all is the ever-present and oft-repeated threat that Stevens will close the Plants. "approached these negotiations with all the tractibility and open-mindedness of Shermari at the out' skirts of Atlanta. " Bovcl Leedom, a former NLRB chairman appointed by President Eisenhower, described Steu"nr in'1967 as " so out of tune with a humane, civilized approach to industrial relations that it should shock even those least sensitive to honor, justice and decent treatment. " His comment is, tragically, as true today as it was then. Some White Sales Are No tn The J une 197 6 merger of the Amal gamated Clothing Workers of America (ACWA) and the Textile America marked a turning poi,nt Workers Union of jWith a combined membersñip of in labor history. more than 500,000 and strong suþport f rom the AF L-ClO (whose president, Cèorge Meany, can be credited with coining the phräse "America's Number One Labor Law Violator'' to characterize J . P. Stevens), the new Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers Union (ACTWU) could not only step up organizing throughout the South, but also lauch the natioòwide- soon to be worldwide-consumer boycottof J .P. Stevens products:. The distinguished lineageof the boycotttactic . can be traced back through US history to the Boston such as Tea Party, but more recent experíences - :-k ô v{i, hr ãq. { ,. 'l I ¡ a-**l Photo from Sôulhern ExPosure' ln an opinion handed down bythe US Courtof Appeals for the Second Circuit¿oncerning new violations at six plants in three locations in1977 , perþaps J udge Feinberg lamented, ''This case, as Stevens denominated be bleakly destined to XVlll in the long list of Stevens litigation, has been a troubling one not only because of the violations of the rights of the employees involved, but 4lso becauiq it raises grave doubts about the ability of the courts to make provisions.of the federal labor law work in the face of persistent violations. " By the time Stevens had- inevitably-been found guilty of bad faith bargaining in the Roanoke Rapids case, Administrative Law J udge Bernard Reis of the Lãbor Board wrote, "l tonc-ludetñat (Stevens) sat, talked, proposed and I.istened for two years without the slightest.intention of attempting to compose differences with the union and reach a bargaining agreement." He observedthat Stevens the United Farmworkers grape and lettuce boycotts aód the ACWA's successf ul boycott of Farah pants a few years ago- helped set the strategy and direction of the Stevens boycott. Hundreds of organizations have rallied behind the consumer bôycott: endorsements have come from the Naiional Council of Churches, the national Catholic associations of priests, nuns and brothers, and the Synagogue Councilof America; from NOW, the NAACPi the Nat'ional Student Association and the ' Products J . P. Stevens products are sold under a wide variety of labels, Here are som e of the.labels you may find in retail stores. DESICNER LABELS SHEETS & PILLOWCASES Utica Tastemaker Yves St. Laurent Suzanne Pleshette Dinah Shore Fine Arts Angelo Donghia Meadowbrook BLANKETS & CARPETS Cacharel Ava Bergmann Hardy Amies Utica Culistan Forstmann TOWELS Tastemaker Utica/Fine Arts Snoopy (comic strip character National Cray Panthers, to name just a few. Across the country, governors, senators, state legislators and city councillors are on record for the consumer boycott. E ndorsements,'of course, have to be tran slated into effective action atthe local retail level if the consumer bovcott is going to succeed. There have been a few cases of stores and/or chains voluntarily discontinuing the saleof Stevens products after only a visit ortwo from a local citizens'committee; more often, after boycott staffers survey retail advertising and inventories of Stevens products in their communities, it is necessary to start an extended dialogue with store managements and to couple such "moral suasion'1 with leafleting and MILITARISM I From the inception of the company during the War of 1812, military contracts have provided the owners with a signif icant source of income. The close relationship between Stevens and the military has been cemented by th.e family's involvement in militaryoperations. Even Capt. Nat Stevens headed the local militia in Andover, Massachusetts. ln the 20th century, the family's participation in Army affairs escalated. During World War l, Nathaniel Stevens(Capt. Nat'sgrandson)headedtheJointCommitteeof WoolManufacturers,.whichcooperatedwith the Council of National Defense and federal purchasing agents to ensure orderly production of goods; he was later the manufacturers' representative to the governmenl War Services Commiitee. His nephéw, Abbot Stevens, served as a captain in the Quartermaster Corp3, assigned to overseeing textile purchases in New England. Stevens received $10 million in military contracts during World'War l. During World War ll, Colonel Robert Stevens, in charge of the Army's textile purchasing, landed more th $50 million in govêrnment contracts forthe company. Attimes, more than 90o/o oî its products wentto the mi tary. Even Horace Stevens once admitted, " lt is probable that it (Stevens) took more than its f ull share of what was offered to the industry. " Throughout the Vietnam buildup, A.W. Anthony, a Stevens vice president, served as the chairman of the Military Fabrics Committeeof the American Textile Manufacturers lnstitute, and received a Patriotic Civilian Service plaque from the Army for his role. Also, for Vietnam duty, the Army presented its Defense Supply Agency Special Award to J .P. Stevens. Atthe peakof the Vietnam war, Stevqns' government sales soared 9qgln;un tg gi,elt percentof the comp.any's total sales in1967 alone, and a total of morethan $236,525,000 1967 through1975. Who says war is hell? Sept.21, 1928 WIN 11 II a other manifestations of strong customer sentinrent. The tasks of boycottorganizers and their allies and volunteers acroSs the country would be greatly simplif iecl if all or most Stevens products were sold uncler the J . P. Stevens label. Unfortunately, they aren't. Only about a third of Stevens output is in the for:m of f inished retail products; the rest consists of "piece goods" (bolts of cloth sold unf inished) and índustrial products. What's more, even the retail products are sold under a wide assortment of labels (seethe liston page 11). Crven súch obstacles to merely identifying Stevens products - you can't simply look for a union label like the Farmworkers' Aztec eagle symbol, for example- it becomes all the more diff icult to gauge the impact of the boycott. Although the company's sa/eS were up about f ive percent in the f irst quarter of 1978 from a year earlier, earnings were down seven percent for the same period - a disparity that suggests there has been widespread "dumping" and heavy discounting of Stevens products. On the New York Stock ExchalBe, the price of Stevens common stock has fallen steadily from a 1976 h igh oÍ 526.62 per share to the present three-yearlow of $14.75. The rapidly escalating anti-SteúenS sentiment among women activists and consumers may have contributed to the company's decision to drop its hosiery line this year and sell the labels (or brand names) to another f irm. There are scattered reportsof declining Stevens sâles in major department stores (such as Cimbels in Pittsburgh, wherethe store management esti,mated a 2oo/o dropearly this year). Dozens of smaller stores . jl ä I \ Ë and chains have voluntarily discontinued sales of Stevens products, as have a few larger chains (most notably, the 76 Bradleels stores in New England). '' I Don't Want To Be Where I 'm Not Wanted' ' ls a spectre haunting the corporate boardrooms? Has ACTWU seized upon "something new and disturbing" in its struggle with J . P. Stevens, as the dean of the elite Wharton School of Business recentlyclaimed? lsthe union, in thewords of aWall Street J ou r n a I editori al, " tenorizing bus i nessmen who do business with Stevens" ? Hardly. Perturbed and panicky remarks of some of its critics notwithstanding; the union's Cbrporate Campaign is, on one level, only a logical ex- tension of the r/power structure research" which has illuminated so much corporate greed and so many political misdeeds sincetheeraof the muckrakers. There is, however, "a gathering momentum against J .P. Stevens" (as Business Week magazine admitted somewhat ruefully last spring) among business and financial interests as well as among consumers-due in large measureto the highly sophisticated research and action program the un ion launched about a year ago. "You cannot viewthe Stevens company as 83 plants, 44,000 employees, a multinational company with endless ties to the Wall Street community,",explains an ACTWU Corporate Campaign director. "That is too unmanageable, too big to deal with." lnstead, he contends, Stevens' real nexus of power can be viewed as " just '13 men" the members of the company's board of directors. Diagram f rom Southern Exposure/LNS, The Ties That Bind fl gr å Ë # W * t ¡ t!! üAf,UTÀClURDT8 HAIVOVEN lNU8T Metropolitan Lrfe SEAMAN'S BANK FOR SAVINGS (iol(lilr¡ilr S¡ttlts I J.PS[EVEj\6&CO,lNlC. ll DRY DOCK i sAvilGs BAIIK E ui BAN¡(ERA ÎRUAT NEW YONK CORFORAI'ON C¡erunruNewYonxConPoRAnoN I¡ús 12WIN Sept.21,1978 üe to¡¡¡s sinæ 1965 PROVIDENT LIFE & ACCIDENT INS. CO. J.PMorganECo. . Goldman, Sæhs hEs mqdô r gþs prelit of ¡sfi),Ooo by ¡ctiru ¡¡ suritie¡ b¡okq fo¡ J .P . Steve¡s & Co. frcm 1967-1916. MONEY ,, After 37 yearsof loyal and faithful service, I have a plaque, $1,360 (total pension bgnejlts_f a¡d brown lufe '" Malone, retired J .P. Stevens ern ploYee. -Thomas lf vou were a J .P. Stevens worker, you'd most likely be earning aUout S¡ . OS an hour and end up with a weekly paycheck (before deductions) about $54 a week less than the national average wage for factory workers. lf , on the other hand, you were a J . P. Stevens e*ecuiiue, you'd be doing a lot better. The list below shows the total paid in salary and bonuses to each of the top eight company off icials in 1976; the "wage per hour" f igure is based on a hypothetical 4O-hourweek' Name James FinleY, chairman StevenS, President Thomas Price, grouPVP Cary, treasurer controllerBurns, Ward grouP VP Wilson, John Peter Kamins, grouP VP PaulNipper, VP Salary & ). Bonuses $368,375. $295,000. $196,633: 5152,633. $135,140. 9128,925. $118,450. 5 95,225. Wages Per Hour 5177.10 141.83 94.54 73.38 64.97 61.94 56.95 45.78 Pþoto from Brown Lung Cotton Earlier this year, Stevens òhairman J ames Finley and David Mitchell, chairman of Avón Products and a member of the Stevens board, felt thè "gathering momentum" in a very direct manner. Both men served as directors of the nation's fourth largest bank, Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co., which has also provided J .P. Stevens with millions of dollars in loans. Bankofficials upto and including "Manny Hanny" chairman Cabriel Hauge were deluged with letters; postcards and other customer protests generated by the same coalition that supports the consumer boycott. The bank had become the f irst major institution widely portrayed as tainted by its ties to Stevens; more than 150 religious, political and community groups ioined with ACTWU and other unions in expressing their "moral outrage." It wasn't long-about six months from the inception of the "Manny Hanny" éffort-beforethe bank began to realize, as a union staffer put it, that the "issue was serious and that they had a lot to lose in tèrms of profits and losses, in termsof their image, reputation and credibility." The New York fimes reported that even "some leading businessmen and bankers are said to have privately supported the departureof Mr. Finley from Manufa.cturers Hanover's board. " And depart from the bank board he did, commenting to reporters at the'-l . P. Stevens annual meeting in Greenville, SC, last March: "To be quite honest, the bank put enough pressure on me that I decided against seeking reelection... I don't wantto bewhere l'm not wanted." Avon's Mitchell soon made his own decision not to seek re-election to the bank board. With what many observers felt was less candor than Finley Mill Blues' had mustered, Mitchell cited only'lbûsiness pres¡ sureí" behiod his departure. Less than a month later, though, MitchelIresigned "with regret" from the Siêvens board, asserting that his"'continuing service (to Stevens)...would not be in thq best interests of Avon or its shareholders, to whqm I owe priniary responsibility as chief executive off icer. " Delegates to the November 1977 National Women's Conference in Houston, Texas, through their own avalanche of postcards to Avon Products, apparently exerted a considerable inf luence on the cosmetics company's management; relying as it does on thousands of individual door-to-door salespeople who fake the pulse of consumers every time they intone "Avon calling," thecompany (through a publ ic relations spokesperson) acknowledged that "feedback from our representatives apross the country" had hastened the departure of itr president from the Steven s board Another Avon ditector, Ralph Manning Brown remains a rriember of the Stev-ens board wh i le r., J also serving as chairman of the powerf ul New York Life lnsurance Co. (whose board, in turn-, also.includes Stevens chairman Finley). New York Life policyholders and stockholders are now being mobilized around the Stevens issue. ' The focus of the Corporate Campaign is shifting to another large New York-based bank, The Seamen's BankforSavings, and itschairman, J.P. Stevens director E. VirgilConway. "l have no intention of resigning as a directorof J'.P. StÞvens,", Conway has written to mäny bf those who protested . Sept.21,1978W|N 13 $ Drawing from Southern Expqsure/LNS. DIVESTITU THE BOYCOTT: WHAT'ISTHECON 7i l i: ,l his links to the textile f irm. '1J ''P. Stevens has an outstanding record," he adds, insisting that he is "proud to be associated with íuch a f ine company." lt iemains to be seen how long he can maintain such an attitude, but it is worth noting that Avon's David Mitchellexpressed a similarly stubborn determination to stick with Stevens as late'as one week before he saw-or was shown -the light. i' : ; :'l At the end of the film, festimony, she had this to say: , I "lt is tcúo latefor us that're sick. But for the people stillworking in the plants, and forourchildren and grandchildren that're coming after us, we ask you to help us. Boycott J .P. Stevens." Resources : Words to Live 8y \ il fl' NI "Stevens never gave us anything," said Roanoke Rapids worker Caroline Brown. "But in spiteof themselves, they did give us one thing - and that was the union. That is one thing they cannot take away f rom us : thè un ion and our respect fgr each other, " Lucy Taylor, a brown lung victim and the immedi ate past pres i dent of the Carol i na Brown Lu n g Associatíon, gave 35 years of her lifeto J .P. Stevens. Southern Exposure, Vol. lV; No.1-2, Box230, Chapel Hill, NC 27514. Southern Exposure, Vol. lll, No.4, Box230, Chapel Hill, NC 27514. lnstitute for Southern Studies, Special Report on J .P. Stevens, "The Men attheTop," 1978. Patricia Ann J ames, "J . P. Stevens: The lndustrial Plantation," (an urtpublished report). National Council of Churches, Division of Church and Society, "Fabricof lnjustice," 475 Riverside Drive, NewYork, NY 10027. z äi OFFICE LISTING ti li t, il ill :l a : : The Stevens Consumer Boycott campaign is always in need of volunteer help. Your energy, skílls and dedication can be put to good use through any of the regional boycott off ices listed below. The regionál off ices can also gupply leaf lets, fact sheets, "calendar cards" (listing the Stevens labels), buttons, bumper stickers, T-shirts and other materials. And if you haven't seen Ïestimony, the 30-m inute color f ilm in wh ich Stevens workçrs tell the shocking story of the company's abuses, you can arrange a frée shoping for your group or organization. NEWYORK-111 E.15th St., NewYork, NY 10003 (260-4400). NEW J ERSEY & CONNECTICUT-9 Washington St., Hamden, CT 06158 (2BB-3519). NEW ENCLAND-150 Lincoln St., Boston, M,\02111 (426-7590). EASTERN PENNSYLVANIA-21-15 South St., Philadelphia, PA 19146 (545-3900). WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA & OHIO-650 Smithfield St., City Center Tower, Pittsburgh , PA15222(281-99S3). ILLINOIS-333 S. Ashland Blvd., Chicago, lL 60607 (421-4i00). WASHINCTON, D.C. -815 16th St. N.W., Washin_gton, DC (638-1002). NORTHWEST- 3924 Whitman Ave. No., Rm. 20, Seattle, WA 98103 (632-7 341'). SOUTHWEST -1627 Locust St., St. Louis, MO63103 (241-001S). SOUTH-4620 S. Fifth Ave., Birmingham , AL35222(592=3774). NORTH E RN CAL I FORN lA 995 Market St . , Room 1412 , San Francisco, CA 94103 (495-7240) . SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA-2501 S. Hill St., Los Angeles, C490007 (749-6161). CANADA 14 t. i WIN Sept. - 33 Ceci I St., Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5T1 N1 (416-368-6540). 21 , 1978 effort to maximize prof its at the expense of the workers. By the same token,'one of the major reasons several.American corporations invest in South Af rica is the low-wage environment created in large measure by apartheid. American corporations have, of course, run > away not on ly f rom the northern section of the Ús iäthe rorih"rn, butto other contindnts as South Africa underthg same name. The Ameriwell. Although the J . P. Stevens Company does can parent controls 5oo/o or more of the subsidnot operate directly in South Af rica, it is noneiary capital. Our Princeton connection is also a a multinational corporation that might theless P. Morgan Company, of the . member board J someday con's¡der direct investment or presence oneof the maior American financial insiitutions in South Africa. Simply put, if the forces of organizing and participating in loans to South helpedto liberatiòn do not achieve their goal of liberation Africa. Since 1975, J .P. Morgan has transact more than $505 million in loans to South i from apartheid, and if Southern textile r4ills are organized, Stevens might decide to run once Africa. again f rom paying decent wages to unionized James D. Finley, chairof the board and chief the sits on workers, and move to a political, secial, and off icer of . P. Stgvens, executive J econom ic environment where maximizi ng board of directors of the Borden and Sperry prof its will continue to occur at the expense of Rand corporations. Both companies operate workers. Apartheid is a proven environment of subsidiaries underthe same name in South this kind. The social, political, and economic asAfrica with the American parent controlling' .sumptions that oppress workers in Stevens' tex5Ùo/o or more of the subsidiary capital. tile mills are the same set of assumptions that These relationsh ips become important to the , divestiture and boycott campaigns only when havê created the çvil and oppressive system of they are f ully exposed, understood, and most apartheid in South Africa, assumptions that do not give priorityto human needs. , impoitantly, ácted upon. They are politically meaningf ul because of the base created for There should be serious{hought given to coalition building among various activist groups joining hands publiclyon campuses in the and individuals coricerned about social and formation of à "coalition-for justice" for both the economic justicerand corporâte investment reoppressed people of South Africa and the exploited workers of J . P. Stevens. This is notto sponsibility suggest that the individual divestiture or antiThe similarities between the J .P. Stevens Company and American corporations investing apáitheid committee and the boycott committee in South Africa are actually in$rinsic. For exshould merge into a single group on both issues, ample, one of the most vicious aspects of our in-' but rather, to urge that leaders of both efforts demonstrate enlightened conCern and underdustrial society is the reality of "runaway shops"orthe "flightof capital." J.P. Stevens is stándiñg by publicly stating that the issueis are a national symbolof runaway shops because it related and that both groups will plan someioint abandoned the,Northeast during the past 30 actiols' ye4rs throwing nearly 12,000 people out of work. Eugenecarroll Thê company, unwilling to pay decentwages to . unionized workeis in the Northeast, f led to the low-wage, anti-union climateof the South in an What are the ties of J .P. Stevens to American companies that invest in South Afrida? Consider thefollowing: R. Manning Brown, Chairperson of Princeton University's Board of Trustees and a directgr of the J . P. Stevens Company, also sits on the board of directors of the Union Carbide Corporation which operates a subsidiary in . Sept.21,1978W|N 15 The conference schedule was divided into issue and sùills workshops. The 14 issues wórkshops were iliiãnr¡uu sessions covering all the bases in specif ic asoects of the anti-nuke struggle. Some of the toöics were: Health, Native Americans, Economics, Export and Proliferation, Transportation, etc. Íhese workshops met four or f ive times during the f ive-day conference; they produced worlcshop reports with recommendations for action and resource listings. The skills workshops were one-session meetings which covered subjects like rate-witlrholding camoaisns, union outreach, newsletters, doing ret"ui.h, nonviolence training, f undraising and canvassing. There were 40 skills workshops in all and most dãlegates got the opportun ity to attend fo'ur or Ì; fiveof them. ln addition to workshops, there were several olenarv sesiions where de-legates could address the entjre conference, an almostcontinuous schedule of f ilms and videotape showings. and literature tables. On Friday night, August 18, the conference took a break and most deleþates attended a Paddlewheel Alliance rally againstthe Marble Hill reactors wh¡ch are 3'l miles upstream of Louisvi I le on the Ohio River" Bar'ry Commoner and'several local activists addressed the Sffi ¡:eople who attended the rally. ln the end, the conference issued a voluminous report (over 100 pages) containing regional reports, issue workshop reports and contact lists. Reports should be available from your local anti-nuke groups who sent delegates to Louisville. The conference had a schizophrenic nature to it. The anti-nuke movement has grown with a f iercely i¡ x Ë ..; \q & regional focus and many activists are suspicious of forming organizations that embrace tlre issues on a national level. Others, however, wish to set up some way to coordinate actions and carnpaigns on a wider scale. While no one I can recall suggested a national organization, many people hoped that the confefence would help start things rolling for some kind of formal coordinatiort between regional groups. There was soÍìe controversy over whether to hold a national action in Washington, f)C. Two separate proposals with a Wash ington scerlario were introduced, one calling for a tnass direct actic¡n in the sulnmer oí 197{}, the other urging a Washington action in the surnmer of 1980 culminatíng ¿r series of events. ì"lre majority of conference delegates supported the general idea of such actions. A small gnoup of clelegates expressed strong objections to the idea. W9 carne away f rom the cpnference with general suppr.rrt for "sonìe kind" of Washington acticn, but with no specif ic proposal that gathered strong support. However conference delegates dieJ voice strong support for the regiorral activities Jrlanned for Karen Silkwor¡d week, Novembcr 11-17 , arrd issued a call for American anti-nuke groups to join their European allies in a series of international protests against nuclear power and weaports on J urre 3 and 4,1979. Tlre conference served rnainly to lrelp arrti-nul