I guess you can't see my button. It says, "I
fought tuition." It's a two- button set, actually. The second button says,
"And tuition won."
You should know that more than 650 students have registered as delegates
here, representing over 130 different schools. You have come despite
freezing weather and hard economic times to do something that I'm not
sure anyone here is ready yet to comprehend. I am absolutely convinced
that you are making history just by being here. You are proving that
the image of the American college student as a career-interested, marriage-
interested, self-centered yuppie is absolutely outdated, that a new
age is on the rise, a new college student.
There's been a lot of talk about comparing today to what went on in
the sixties. I would remind you that in 1960, when we started the Student
Nonviolent Coordinating Committee to fight in the South in the civil
rights movement, less than 30 people came together to begin it. The
famous Students for a Democratic Society, which we're all reading about,
was formed in 1962 with exactly 59 people. No one before has done anything
this bold, imaginative, creative, and daring to bring together this
many different strains of people, who all believe in radical change
in our society. It is just an amazing feat. And I wish you the best
of luck today, and especially tomorrow, when you have to decide whether
to go forward or backward. I'd also like to take this moment to salute
our glorious actor-in- chief: Happy Birthday Ronald Reagan! I don't
believe anyone in here believes it's "Good morning in America" tonight.
I have a lot of speeches in my head: On the CIA, urine testing, nuclear
power, saving water: that's my local battle. We're fighting the Philadel-
phia Electric Company's attempt to steal the waters of the Delaware
River for yet another nuclear plant. A local battle? I don't know. One
out of ten Americans drink from that river. I also speak on the modern
history of student protest and on Central America, where I've been five
times. Every time I get before a microphone I'm extremely nervous that
chromosome damage and Alzheimer's will take their toll. I'll come out
foaming at the mouth, accusing the CIA of pissing in the nuclear plants,
to poison the water, to burn out the minds of youth, so they'll be easy
cannon fodder for the Pentagon's war in Central America. Actually, that's
probably not a bad speech.
On Tuesday I had to give a speech at the local grammar school to nine-
year-olds. I said, "Go ahead, pick any subject you want." They wanted
to hear about hippies. My 16-year-old kid, America, heard me give this
speech about how you can't have political and social change without
cultural change as well, and he said, "Daddy, you're not gonna bring
back the hippies, are you? The hippies go to Van Halen concerts, get
drunk, throw up on their sweatshirts and beat up all the punks in town."
I said, "Okay, no hippies." That was last year, this year he's changed
his mind. His mother and I were activists in the sixties, and he heard
all the anti-war stories over and over again, never believed any of
it. Then one night last spring he saw the documentary "Twenty Years
Ago Today" about the effect of the Beatles' Sergeant Peppers Lonely
Hearts Club Band on us all. It's about the only thing I'm ever going
to recommend to anybody about the sixties, a simply brilliant documentary.
He sat there watching cops fight with young people in the streets, people
put flowers at the Pentagon in the soldiers' bayonets, and the Pentagon
rise in the air, he saw it move just like we said it did.
Tears came streaming out of his eyes, and he called up and said, "Daddy,
why was I born now? I should have been a hippie."
When I went to college long ago there was a ritual that we all had
to go through at freshman induction. We were herded into a big room
and the dean of admissions came and gave us a famous speech, "Look to
your right, look to your left, one of you three won't be here in four
years when it comes time to graduate." I'm going to say to you, "Look
to your right, look to your left, two of you three aren't going to be
here in four years." That's about the attrition rate of the Left. I'm
sure that many of the people who want to organize interplanetary space
connections have got everything worked out with Shirley MacLaine, and
it's okay with me that they become moonies and yuppies and then born-again
Mormons. They're not the ones that keep me up at night. But I worry
about the good organizers, the successful organizers. You're the ones
who know that you can actually get better at this, that you can get
good at it. You know that being on the side of the angels, being right,
isn't enough. To succeed you also have to work very hard with lots of
cooperation from those around you. You have to have your wits about
you continuously, show up on time, and follow through. These are the
things that take place behind the scenes that keep you aimed at a goal,
at victory, at success. And I worry because somehow on the Left, all
too often, it's like three people in a phone booth trying to get out.
Two are really trying to kick the third one out, and that's how they
spend all their time. The third one's always called some dirty name
that ends in an "ist." It's been a movement that devours its own. I
look out at you and I think of my comrades, not the people you saw in
The Big Chill, but people that were great movement organizers. You know
some of their names and many others you don't know. They risked not
just their careers, marriage plans and ostracism from their family,
but their lives. They faced mobs with chains and brass knuckles, the
clubs of the police, the dirty tricks and infiltrations of the FBI,
the CIA, Army intelligence, Navy intelligence, and local red squads
all around the country. They had pressure put on their families. They
were prepared for all of this from the moment they decided to go against
the grain and take on the powers that be. They were not prepared for
the infighting. They were not prepared for a movement that devours itself.
That has got to cease. I remember a very free and open democratic meeting
in a room in New York City in 1971. All the various strains were there.
There was one group that disagreed with the decision- making structure
that had been set up. They wanted to settle their differences with the
majority so they came armed with baseball bats. I can't remember the
group's name - it was The National Labor Committee or Caucus - but I
do remember the name of its leader, Lynn Marcus, better known today
as Lyndon LaRouche.
The movement has had its share of other problems. We are too issue-
oriented and not practical enough. We debate issues endlessly, deciding
whose issue is more important than whose other issue, and so letting
the moment of opportunity in history pass. By that time there's another
issue there that's outstripped the other two. We debate which "ism"
is more important than which other "ism," and I agree that all the isms
lead to schisms which lead to wasms. We need a new language as we enter
the next century.
We need to be rid of false dichotomies. There's been a big discussion
going on for the last couple of days here about whether the organizing
focus should be local, regional, national or interplanetary. I have
never seen a national issue won that wasn't based on grassroots organizing
and support. On the other hand, I have never ever seen a local issue
won that didn't rely on outside support and outside agitators. Another
false dichotomy is one that I call "In the System/out of the System."
Between inside the system and outside it is a semipermeable membrane.
And either-or is only a metaphysical question, not a practical one.
The correct stance, especially now in these times, is one foot in the
street - the foot of courage, that gets off the curbstone of indifference
- and one foot in the system - the intelligent foot, the one that learns
how to develop strategies, to build coalitions, to negotiate differences,
to raise money, to do mailing lists, to make use of the electronic media.
You need that foot, too. The brave foot goes out into the street to
strike out against the enculturation process that says: "Stay indoors,"
"Don't go out in the street," "There's crime in the street," "It's bad
in the street," "You lose your job in the street," "You'll be homeless,"
"It's terrible," '.'Yecch." Civil disobedience - blocking trucks, digging
up the soil, occupying buildings, chaining yourself to fences (I spent
my summer vacation chained to a fence) - can be a necessary act of courage,
but it doesn't take a hell of a lot of brains.
Decision making has been a problem on the Left. In the sixties we
always made decisions by consensus. By 1970, when you had 15 people
show up and three were FBI agents and six were schizophrenics, universal
agreement was getting to be a problem. I call it "The Curse of Consensus
Decision Making," because in the end consensus decision making is rule
of the minority: the easiest form to manipulate, the easiest way to
block any real decision making. Trying to get everyone to agree takes
forever. Usually the people are broke, without alternatives, with no
new language, just competing to see who can burn the shit out of the
other the most. There must be a spirit of agreement and in this way
most decisions are made by consensus, but there must also be a format
whereby you can express your differences. The democratic parliamentary
procedure - majority rule - is the toughest to stack, because in order
to really get your point across you've got to get cooperation, and to
go out and get more people to come in to have those votes the next time
around.
My vision of America is not as cheery and optimistic as it might be.
I agree with Charles Dickens, "These are the worst of times, these are
the worst of times." Look at the institutions around us. Financial institutions,
bankrupt; religious institutions, immoral; communications institutions
don't communicate; educational institutions don't educate. A poll yesterday
showed that 489o of Americans want someone else to run than the current
candidates. The last election in 1987 had the lowest turnout since 1942.
There are people that say to a gathering such as this - students taking
their proper role in the front lines of social change in America, fighting
for peace and justice - that this is not the time. This is not the time7
You could never have had a better time in history than right now.
My fingers are crossed because I hope that you won't let the internal
differences divide you. I hope that you'll be able to focus on the real
enemies that are out there. In the late sixties we were so fed up we
wanted to destroy it all. That's when we changed the name of America
and stuck in the "k." The mood today is different, and the language
that will respond to today's mood will be different. Things are so deteriorated
in this society, that it's not up to you to destroy America, it's up
to you to go out and save America. The same impulse that helped us fight
our way out of one empire 200 years ago must help us get free of the
Holy Financial Empire today. The transnationals - with their money in
Switzerland, headquarters in Luxembourg, ships in tax-free Panama, natural
resources all over the emerging world, and their sleepy consumers in
the United States - do not have the interest of the United States at
heart. Ronald Reagan and the CIA are traitors to America, they have
sold it to the Holy Financial Empire. The enemy is out there, he s not
in this room. People are allowed to have different visions and different
views, but you have to have unity.
You also have to communicate a message and to do that you need a medium.
We know television as the boob tube. We know educational television
is an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms. We know it from reading fake
intellectuals like Alan Bloom and his Closing of the American Mind,
or from reading good ones like Neil Postman, whose Amusing Ourselves
to Death: Public Discourse in the A8e of Showbiz is a wonderful book.
Bloom wants us to shut off the t.v. and start reading the Bible, and
Postman just wants us to shut off the t.v. They are critics of t.v.,
but they are not organizers. A lot of people say, Abbie, you just perform
for the media, that's your duty, you manipulate, a lot of things like
that. This is a misconception. I have never in my life done anything
for the media. I m speaking to you through a microphone because my voice
is soft, and I couldn't reach all of you unless I used it. That's why
I use the microphone. But my words are not for this goddamn microphone.
If you want to reach hundreds of thousands or millions of people, you
have to use the media and television. Television has an immense impact
on our lives. We don't read, we just look at things. We don t gather
information in an intellectual way, we just want to keep in touch.
As bad as it is, television has the ability to penetrate our fantasy
world. That s why the images are at first quick and action-packed, very
short, very limited and very specific, and afterward vague, blurry,
and distorted. How can these images not be very important? They determine
our view of the world. We in New England would not have known there
was a civil rights movement in the South. We would not have known racism
existed, that blacks were getting lynched, that blacks were not getting
service at a Woolworth counter, if it hadn t been for television. We
weren't taught it in our schools or churches. We had to see it and feel
it with our eyes. You have to use that medium to get across the image
that students have changed. You have to show it to them. Let the world
watch, just like we watch students in the Gaza strip fight for their
freedom and justice, students in Johannesburg, in E1 Salvador, in Central
America, in the Philipines fight for their freedom.
One hundred and thirty schools represented here today out of 5,000
colleges and universities in America reminds us that going against the
grain at the University of South Dakota or Louisiana State is a very
tough, lonely job. You have to feel that you're part of something bigger.
You want to know that there's a movement out there. That's where the
role of a national student organization becomes so important, giving
hope and comfort to people that are out there trying to make change
at a grassroots level.
The student movement is a global movement. It is always the young
that make the change. You don't get these ideas when you're middle-aged.
Young people have daring, creativity, imagination and personal computers.
Above all, what you have as young people that's vitally needed to make
social change, is impatience. You want it to happen now. There have
to be enough people that say, "We want it now, in our lifetime. " We
want to see apartheid in South Africa come down right now. We want to
see the war in Central America stop right now. We want the CIA off our
campus right now. We want an end to sexual harassment in our communities
right now. This is your moment. This is your opportunity.
Be adventurists in the sense of being bold and daring. Be opportunists
and seize this opportunity, this moment in history, to go out and save
our country. It's your turn now. Thank you.
-Abbie Hoffman
I thought this story was fairly pertinent to Abbie.
This letter was taken from the Denver Rocky Mountain News
Flag's Meaning Goes Beyond its Appearance
Regarding Mike Rosen's July 2 column "Burn
the flag; take the heat": Define "American flag." Is it made from a particular
material (cloth, paper or plastic) or a specific size? What about the
image of the American flag (a painting, postage stamp or a sewn patch)?
Do these also fall under the flag protection amendment, too?
Define "desecration." Is it burning, soiling or ripping? What happens
to the person who flies the flag so long that the wind rips its edges?
What happens to the artist like Jasper Johns, who painted a white version
of the American flag; did he desecrate it?
Does a person desecrate the flag by displaying it upside down, sporting
a flag tattoo or wearing it on clothing? How will the flag, be regulated
in this legal quagmire?
Examine the current limitations on the First Amendment. Laws covering
libel, child pornography and crying, "Fire"' in a crowded theater protect
people from actual harm. The flag protection amendment protects people
like Rosen from becoming upset. The amendment eliminates tolerance,
dissension and disagreeable debate. This is fascism in the making.
The American flag, is a powerful symbol, rich with meaning beyond its
physical appearance. It is not a zealot's icon, which is what Rosen
and the misguided right-wing are trying to make it. The flag's symbolism,
its meaning and importance, live in our hearts - a place where it can
never, ever be desecrated.
-Chris Nitsche