BASE by The Activist

Building Alliances for Social Engagement

Acknowledgements: Aarom Smith - Web Design ASSG - Funding CU Imaging Services Nam Fernandez Rep Council - Funding Writers/ Artists/ Photographers Funded by the Office of the Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs and the Office of the Chancellor Cover photo by Tiffanie Battram Cover artwork by Sean Daly

letter from the editor

s we enter the holiday season, I have become intent on sharing every aspect of my cultural experience of Christmas with my partner. Having come from India four months ago, this will be his first Christmas in the United States. I intend to buy a tree with the ornamental works, string popcorn, drive through neighborhoods looking for Christmas lights, watch How the Grinch Stole Christmas, and exchange presents while simultaneously stuffing him full of eggnog and all manner of my family’s traditional Christmas cookies, which he will also help me bake. In a moment of lighthearted spontaneity, I began teaching him Christmas carols. Not a fan of the holly-jolly music, I went straight to traditional Christian songs beginning with “God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen.” With good humor, Sahil repeated every line back to me, only replacing Christ with Ram. These moments of cultural exchange, when sometimes our experiences clash and sometimes they blend in surprising and moving ways, are moments that I hope I’m growing from. Every day that I am a part of this multicultural relationship I learn new things about Sahil’s culture, his country’s history, and the incredible diversity of India; her languages, ethnicities, foods, traditions, and religions. From these exchanges, I learn new things about myself. I have confronted personal arrogance arising from my astonishment that Sahil does not want to apply for American citizenship; from my surprise that he did not know who Amelia Earhart was (doesn’t everyone know American history?). I also experience renewed excitement and appreciation for the luxuries available to me in the United States and my own cultural experience. The holiday season, with all of its rich expressions through Kwanza, Hanukkah, Christmas, and every other way one chooses to celebrate or believe, is a great time to celebrate diversity, to give and receive experience of each other’s cultures. Personally, I feel that appreciating cultural diversity is an endeavor which is overlooked by many of us throughout the year. If we all made it a point to explore new ways of celebrating, of eating and dressing, of participating in family and community, worshipping or not worshipping, in speaking and listening, our tolerance for one another could develop into true appreciation for diversity across the planet. For the opportunity to grow so much, I thank everyone who has ever been patient enough to share a bit of their experience with me. Sincerely, Ashley McPhee Editor-in-Chief

mission

staff

ashley mcphee - editor-in-chief jovanna avila jessica barber tiffanie battram lucy brown sean daly rebecca diaz alyssa ebert mickey ellenwood rosemary kalasz kelly kaoudis andrew maples jack ringel anne robertson evan sandsmark

To create a free journal run by student volunteers, acting as a forum for those with concerns relating to cultural diversity, gender/sexuality, human rights, and environmental issues, among other areas of interest, in order to explore and discuss these issues, while educating ourselves and a broader communitythe creation of which we endeavor to achieve. We wish to facilitate communication between groups of people who could one day be partners in a common effort. As a result we hope to promote the involvement of new voices and perspectives of people with passions that we may help foster.

table of contents 01. 09. 21. 42. 48.

Essays “not grateful, not dead yet” by jack ringel “gaga” by katie schetlick “inspiration from the true light beavers” by leah rothschild “letter to the editor” by melanie pitnick “by any means necessary” by sean daly Poetry and Prose

03. 14. 19. 25. 31.

“utopia ou topos” by tiph parrish “occupation” by nancy stohlman “epoch” by sarah cooke “pornography” by nancy stohlman “ejaculating jealousy” by aimee herman Special Feature

35.

“notes on socially engaged writing” by rebecca diaz

Art

07. “girl with the flower” by anne robertson 08. “yellowstone” by jess steinitz 15. “por amor usa” by brian funk 16. “protect” by theresa karsner 17. “we sit in trees” by theresa karsner 18. “the city life” by amy longfellow 40. “may day” by brian funk 41. “bad astronaut” by joey strine 44. “camdombe drummers” by brian funk 45. “water rights” by charlie simpkin 46. “the giving of the gift” by anne robertson 55. “the dock” by anne robertson 56. “alternative ways to use an ak-47” by aaron young

Essay

not grateful, not dead yet: jack ringel Disability Rights Activism

’ve noticed a fair amount of talk (though there could certainly be more!) among various activist circles about un-fair and potentially stealthy and malignant privileges. Usually, the discussion revolves around gender, race, and class. I will use myself as an example. Statistically, and hegemonic culturally speaking, as a white male I am likely to make more money, earn respect among my peers more easily, and live longer then my non-white and non-male counterparts. In terms of class privilege, as someone born to an upper middle class family, I am more likely to go to college and to live in a safe neighborhood then someone lower on the socio-economic ladder. To anyone who has critically studied stratification and inequality, these things come as no surprise, and are indeed important for understanding injustice. However, I was wrong to ever think that checking myself with regard to race, class, and gender was enough. Although a number of other factors could be implanted to discuss and analyze privilege, one in particular has evaded my consciousness up until recently: Disability. What about society is arranged to privilege me as a physically and mentally capable person? (Defined, of course, within the framework of a particular society… is a person healthy if they are doing remarkably well in a sick society? But I’ll save that for another essay). Next time you are out in your own community, take notice of how accessible different locations are. Chances are that many places, public and private, are illequipped to allow for a person in a wheelchair, for example, to use the restroom or in some cases to even enter the location at all (conjures up images of the early 90’s protest where disabled folks literally crawled up the steps of the White House in protest of their lack of rights). Next, think about the last time you had a meaningful interaction with someone who has a significant disability. I have lost count of the number of times that I have seen people ignore my client/friend (I work as a personal attendant for a woman with cerebral-palsy), or even worse, treat her in a childish and condescending way. Not that intelligence and accreditation are the all-inclusive markers of one’s worthiness for dignity or respect, but she is currently working on her second college degree, is raising two young children, and has been arrested in political

protests demanding civil liberties to others like herself (diving off of her chair onto the ground of the governor’s office and refusing to move). If that’s not worthy of respect, what is? (Did I mention that she has limited use of her hands, and types poetry using a ball-cap rigged with a metal rod and a duct-taped plastic spoon?). Physical and mental status ought to be placed within the same discussion of privilege as the issues of race, class, gender, religion, and other indicators of inequality and injustice. If you have a chance, take a look at the forms required for Medicaid and imagine someone who cannot use their hands, or who is blind, or possesses some other disability, trying to fill them out to receive the care that they need to survive. How many houses do you know that allow for

electric wheelchairs to enter? Did you ever hear the issue of ‘attendant care’ come up during the recent healthcare debates? What options exist outside of nursing homes for a person who needs assistance? When was the last time that a person with a significant disability was seen in a commercial? Magazines? The newspaper? How many people in wheelchairs were at the last party or bar you went to? Your workplace? What kind of message does this send? If you are personally working on raising your awareness and socio-political consciousness, then you must add the lens of disability, because in the words of a now famous slogan of ADAPT (the largest grassroots disability rights group in the country), many empowered disabled people are “not grateful, and not dead yet”.

poem

utopia ou topos “no place” tiph parrish on walls of a Houston bayou red graffiti reads Janet I love you my favorite tree cut to a stump toni said mulberries are best when dried a tree is best when alive sap soaked i can’t hear crying with my ears only hands feel remorse for being human lovely daisy chains embracing our bodies on playground swing sets smells of cut grass & what we call weeds up-rooted because we want things perfect. we are already flawless. i was fifteen before i saw a flower in the raw, wild, unpicked thought flowers grew from vases in my aunt’s den bayou city a loveless whore. elicits sensation without feeling. i want Audre Lourde’s erotic. i want flesh on flower petals & dew on grass. not raindrops smoking off hot concrete i want to press my head

to railroad tracks & hear the songs of my ancestors. i want spoken words in baritone vibrations & no more National Geographic articles reading, every 14 days a language dies. i want love smothering the sirens to stopâ&#x20AC;&#x201D; & car horns to be conch shellsâ&#x20AC;&#x201D; drawing in sandâ&#x20AC;&#x201D; drawing with fingers a sun, a labyrinth. myself, little girl reborn on the window of Saturday morning cartoons with my brothers and Scooby Doo before school. i want my grandmother to brush my hair, love me, put me to sleep, i want my father to not be a pedophile. i want my city to be etched in dismantled rifle dust, the highways to be dirt hills, skyscrapers to resemble the Himalayas i want every reservation wall to be broken & land reclaimed by people who have loved it for centuries.

i want my mother, unborn a womin, unmolested. her eyes the color of deep ocean & bones

i want sickness of beauty infecting my pores until scabs of leaves are left, i want blood to fill our veins & never chalk outlines, James of seventeen years old chalk outlines, & yellow tape i want the yellow we find to be on bees, on dandelions, on piss after making love, on a school bus turned greenhouse by Vietnam veterans. i want pigment to be secondary to beliefs & values, my brother, poor white, blue eyed blond headed man of 27 with depth of soul like Miles Davis. i want my brother, all six feet four inches, never tokenized or berated on the basis of phenotype, i want his voice in eardrums of silence. i want a cure for depression. & no more anti-depressants with side effects whispering i canâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t fuck, i canâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t have an orgasm. i want to de-create high fructose corn syrup, only obesity of kindness spills over bus seats. i want television with Viagra commercials & Sarah Palin & soap operas to be a story we one day tell our children.

touching rhythmic jazz notes every Thursday night.

i want a cure for cancer. so Gretchenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s breasts grow back, & she doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t ask if she is still a womin. i want my uncle to have died an old man not at 34 when AIDS reduced his body to bones. i want the only love affair we have to be with our planet bent on children with gum-covered fingers. cars to be made into buildings for the homeless. i want love to be the only thing we ever fight for. i want to shove oil, diamonds, violence & hatred back into the womb of our mother, i want someone to listen to me at midnight as though i were the favorite song theyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d never heard before. i want to feel what my heartbeat sounds like in your head, in the palm of your hand. i want to move beneath light skin on dark skin on you on me, i want to play doctor & the only thing to operate on are your cheek bones with my mouth with time standing off in the corner dumbfounded.

& technically we should all be calling ourselves angels again.

girl with the flower anne robertson

Art

yellowstone 08

jess steinitz

Essay

Gaga

katie schetlick

The West Bank/The Separation Barrier/The Gaza

Strip

[insert one body here] “My body did not know where to stand. Hovering, attempting to straddle; outstretched right and left. One side longing for recognition and justice, the other for transcendence and anarchy. So extreme a pull, the brain and heart are left floating in a horizontal plane. Thinking feeling; indiscernible. No longer relegated to particular spaces by an anatomical form, the organs, their functions conflate. I become confused. Horrified, in fact.” [insert another body here]

arch 2, 2009: Sixty years, three months and two days after the UN signed a mandate to partition Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states and only two months and two days after Israeli forces launched their attack against Hamas, against the people of Gaza, against all Palestinians alike, I entered a dance studio to practice Gaga, a new movement practice, with Ohad Naharin, the artistic director of Israel’s Batsheva Dance Company. Batsheva was passing through New York as part of a North American tour in honor of the 60th anniversary of Israel’s birth as a nation. Batsheva’s celebratory tour had certainly been met by angry protestors along the way. Signs from Vancouver to Minneapolis read, “No Dancing on Gaza’s Grave.” While in New York for the week of the company’s performances at the Brooklyn Academy of Music, Naharin decided to hold a Gaga class open to the public. No protestors attended, at least none with signs. The mirrors had been turned; their representative surfaces now watched the wall and I/we (including Naharin) were on the inside. He entered the studio with a humility that I, regrettably, can but describe here…for its force depends on direct human-to-human contact. His gaze was soft, reflective yet penetrating. His body assumed a relaxed attentiveness. Unguarded, without pretense, not world famous choreographer, master teacher, not even “dancer”, Naharin literally and figuratively

moved within our space. It was a true commons. All notions of a frontal orientation were confused as he circled around and through the gaps our bodies left open and encouraged us, the full participants, to do the same. Behind turned mirrors, in a realm beyond imitation as I came to understand it, I/ we were asked to perceive one another through one another’s bodies like translucent negatives waiting to be developed and therefore, were instructed to never stop moving. Paralysis: a static image, limiting potential; a non-position I/we typically occupy in the crevice between the wall and the mirror where we must constantly face the point of view from our supposed image. Refusing to accept such a deadened and reliant figuration, Gaga is always in possibility never a certainty. “There is no dead flesh in Gaga,” Naharin says. Bodies paralyzed by habitual tendencies and thoughtless action were brought back to life as I/ we slapped, as vigorously as possible, the skin encasing our closest neighbor. A pleasurable sting enveloped, and a reverberation of flesh impacting flesh filled my/our ears. Neighbors were advised to give into the pain, to soften and receive the other’s hands. We were dancing together, but this dance did not require a charted topography of bodies circling in unison. It seemed to be a folk dance of free reign that confused the world’s geographical patterning, ignored preconceived borders. And yet, I couldn’t help but recall the world of infinite fortification between the mirror

and the wall; the world I/we would need to reenter and interact with another in a way which necessitates a defensive construction of being; the world where at that very moment a Palestinian was undoubtedly clearing away the rubble of what was once their home—the world of enunciation. Bank, barrier, strip—the words and their connotative force act as more decisive partitions than the physical borders themselves. Bodies, though capable of scaling wired fences and concrete walls, choose, more often than not, to remain on either side of the divide. Words, a projected and subjugating force, keep them there. Words dictate belonging—I am this, and therefore I must reside here. By constructing the borders that physically separate land and the people who stand on either side, words give breath to materiality and make it identifiable. As Georges Bataille reminds us in his writings on the labyrinth, “all existence is tied in particular to language.” Thus, one might argue, the particularity of our existence as beings, as distinguishable entities, depends on language’s ability to give definitive shape to the figuration of a supposed sovereign self, marking in minds clearly one from another. The distinction of one from another is audibly and visually, here in text, clear despite categorical vagueness. One and another’s phonetical distinctions impart two separate existences that require a spatial reckoning with on the part of a specific human being. However, as Judith Butler notes in the afterward of

the journal of the Modern Language Association of America, Humanities In Human Rights, “the negotiation of humanity happens at a juncture where the human confronts the limits of self definition” and goes on to argue that language requires “humans” to occupy a space that cannot avoid the exclusion of what might be found outside its margins. So how then might humans unravel themselves from the ontology of their nameable form and instead float in an expanse so undecipherable? Here or there, belonging to one or another, poses no option for middle ground, of relationship to a conjunction. And it is in the defense of and loyalty to an identity (the captured human form), when words become troublesome and potentially dangerous. [ Jew] (Israel) [Arab] (Palestine) Unfortunately, the maintenance of separate identities and therefore spatial sovereignty is not as clean as the words typed on the page. Beneath imprinted letters are bodies violently stamped out through years and years of written resolutions for deeper demarcations of belonging. Israel, a nation branded by contrived and contentious barriers which official seals embossed over sixty years ago, lays manifest a space of over-determined belonging, where an inescapable corporeal connection causes the divided to incite physical violence against the body that they refuse to call their own. Israel, a state set up to rectify damages done by previous exclusionary

practices, is plagued by its own definition as a Jewish-state. This is an epidemic, one of existence dependent upon identity that is literally devouring bodies. However, there is a potential new body composing in Israel that might help heal the disease of enunciation with symptoms of dichotomization. It is a body fed up with confines, with banks, barriers, and strips. It is a body that explodes from the bracketed territory of words into utter nonsense. It is a body that chips away at the notion of essential being, of spatial sovereignty. For it is a body, more rightly so a collection of bodies, that come to realize “I exist in an important sense for you by virtue of you.” This body of nonsense, the body of Gaga: Gaga is a new way of gaining knowledge and self awareness through your body. Gaga is a new way for learning and strengthening your body, adding flexibility, stamina and agility while lightening the senses and imagination. Gaga raises awareness of physical weaknesses, awakens numb areas, exposes physical fixations and offers ways for their elimination. Gaga elevates instinctive motion, links conscious and subconscious movement. Gaga is an experience of freedom and pleasure. In a simple way, a pleasant place, comfortable clothes, accompanied by music, every person with himself and others. (Ohad Naharin, Gaga introduction sheet) So what if bodies were to practice what Gaga seems to be asking? To shake, quake, and explode. What if bodies were to rid existence of its particularity by confounding its tie to language? Might

the body break the shackles of imposed order, erasing the distinction of one from another? More importantly, the necessity to defend a sovereign space? Denying any opportunity for unilateral affiliations to prosper, (i.e. “every person with himself and others”) through an intervention of meaninglessness, the movement practice of Gaga developed by Ohad Naharin sensitizes the body, numbed by words, to its revolutionary force. And with the eradication of the “ambition to be on stage,” the movement avoids the need for recognition. In Gaga, words no longer inscribe the body head to toe. The ability to identify a head from a toe is of little concern. Rather, Gaga calls for a survey that does not result in charting a map, a blot on openness. Made-up words like biba, pica, and lena describe areas of the body, images, and actions simultaneously. They are nonsense words that navigate the body through a corporeal exploration. While on their journey, practitioners might be asked to connect to their oba, or the idea of “traveling stuff,” which can also be interpreted as surrender—the giving into everything that allows explosiveness. Surrender and explosion, Naharin blends opposing forces into a single word to confuse the body’s inclination to settle into patterns of a developing language. As Naharin explains, “each word is a world.” These worlds allow bodies to sense conjunctively, occupying the experience between one and another that are often fundamentally opposed. Butler’s “negotiation of humanity at a juncture”

must be recalled. Because, Butler further postulates, the claim of human rights is articulated in a speech situation in which someone can speak in a language that is not only understood but engaged, received, responded to…the conditions of possibility of making a claim already raise the problem of address and translation- of communicability, the norms of reasonableness. To complicate the “norms of reasonableness” in his nonsense language, Naharin has begun altering its terminology. Lena and biba have been cast aside and replaced by nova and charlie (the names of friends’ babies). Preciousness is defiled. Dissociation ensues. So what if a human rights discourse originated in a sovereign space where bodies do not speak out as subjects or let action be guided by judgment? Such a discussion is a resolution, one that we may never locate even in the space of Gaga. Because once a solution is reached, it stops moving. Judgment from a particular perception will always precede reality. Thus, I/we are faced with the undeniable horror of narrow power structures. The movement cannot help but become relegated to [Gaga] the cultural export of Israel. It is a movement which could have only formed in a space like Israel and therefore will be forever tied to that particular body of land. A body, I must remember, that not all are privileged to embody. The prospect of taking a Gaga class in Tel Aviv is not even a possibility for most Palestinians

who reside on the other side of the wall, fortified. All hope for Gaga to recontextualize the body, however, must not be abandoned. Gaga may never be able to maintain its sovereignty as nonsense, but perhaps it will provide a space where bodies can sneak a peek beneath the law bound epidermis (coat of words) and realize that there is no reason to fight to be one or another.

[Peace] may never be found in the Middle East, but the practice of Gaga has the potential to slowly insight it through a movement which proposes solutions that cannot be enunciated. In the words of the most prolific human rights activist Mahatma Gandhi, â&#x20AC;&#x153;In a gentle way you can shake the world.â&#x20AC;? But those are just words.

Poem

occupation nancy stohlman The occupation of the occupiers is to occupy the occupied. Depending on who is doing the occupying, this is called “security.” The occupation occupies the space once occupied by the occupied at the onset of the occupation. While the occupiers are occupied with the occupation of keeping the occupied under occupation, the occupation of the occupied is to resist occupation. This resistance is usually called terrorism. The occupied territories are simultaneously occupied by both the occupied (called militants) and the occupiers (called settlers and/or liberators). Eventually the occupiers will fully occupy the land that once held the villages of the occupied before the occupation. This is often referred to as progress. The occupations of the occupied under occupation are now unoccupied. But the occupation does not occupy the minds of those not occupied or occupying. In fact, they don’t want to be occupied by thoughts of the occupied or the occupation.

Occupation, after all, is such a harsh word.

Art

por amor usa brian funk

Art

protect

Art

we sit in trees

theresa karsner

Art

the city life amy longfellow

Poem

epoch sarah cooke I. wordless vigil or they dare police

at the Brooklyn Bridge

because a man was shot

on his wedding day

50 bullets

sound like the outcry

of those forgotten by picket fences smoldering paces toward rebellion the crucial preface

but not the revolution itself

make no mistake

policy is reform II. revolution is

the other side of the pillow

your face hasnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t touched all night

the cool side

itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s waking only to stretch your arms

flip the pillow

and close your eyes

around your lover

cheek in the curve of his neck

because your mind is no commodity

inspiration from the true light beavers

Essay

leah rothschild

he True Light Beavers (and subsequently, the book they put together) were a group of individuals who decided to “tune in and drop out,” in a way—to live together, off their land, raise their families together and leave the changing world behind. It is in its essence the same story of how my friends and I bought a diesel engine school bus, converted it to run on used restaurant grease (as well as into a mobile home) and travel across the country… When going against the grain and resting on the fringe of our society, some of the greatest agents of change remain silenced, while the souvenirs of their existence rest on the bookshelves of a generation becoming grandparents. Luckily, those of us looking for an alternative to mainstream society often find the path all on our own. Certainly any teacher, crafts person, artist, writer, engineer, doctor, musician and so forth, will find their trade with or without the many tools and mentors that can aid in one’s proficiency and understanding of a skill. After rejecting my place in the normalcy of American society, I am writing from an eight-year perspective of working and living collectively. Part of the story I am telling brings together a group of eight individuals (five band members known as the Jugtown Pirates of Lake Champlain, three lady Pirates, and our faithful roadie/ driver/mechanic) each equipped with developed trades and budding ideas on how to survive in this world without retiring into the run-of-the-mill marathon of working a 9-5 in order to fulfill material dreams so cleverly installed by our capitalistic-a American society. In our lust to unplug we were drawn to the new machine of gypsy dreams, that of a sort of “free fuel,” a vegetable oil-powered school bus. The alternative living and alternative energy of today’s world is a brightly decorated canvas of possibilities that takes much influence from the alchemists of the counter-culture. This canvas includes: urban sustainable living with backyard chickens and gray water plumbing; organic community gardens in major metropolises; ‘Earth Ship’ building constructions from mud, straw, discarded tires, glass bottles and aluminum cans to create an energy efficient, ‘off the grid’ home; alternative energy sources such as methane gas extractions from land fills to power anything

from factories to cars; giant windmills with blades as long as 32 people holding hands that can power city blocks; and the academic side of it all: degree-level education on elements of sustainable culture, design and even composting. In recent history, there have repeatedly been times when buses were converted into traveling homes—many used to spread the ideas of freethinking across this land of closed minds. One can easily imagine The Beats and The Pranksters, The Dead and Jefferson Airplane, Bread and Puppet, The Green Tortoise and the like—jumping in their seats at the opportunity to use a fuel recycled from the by-product of greasy spoons. Using vegetable oil as a fuel originates from Rudolf Diesel’s engine that was designed to run off corn oil over a century ago. This low emissions fuel is a part of the alternatives that exist today. With an understanding of the simple systems of the world, we learn how comfortable life can be when we can simply unplug from the globalized corporate control of commodities and reconnect with things more important in life than money and possessions. Of course, there isn’t enough used cooking grease to power every car in America, but if we choose to do so, we can seek out the alternatives to the very things that imprison us and drive our country to war which in turn imprisons those who have never lived with the mass consumption of Western Civilization. The President of Venezuela, Hugo Chávez, once noted that if the rest

of the world consumed as much oil as Americans, the combined resources that exist would be depleted in 19 days! It’s also important to mention here that by no means does this article promote the US growing genetically modified (GMO) corn for fuel, which is a completely different bag of worms, a dirty business and in no relation to recycling restaurant grease. In fact, the opportunity to produce alternative fuels and energy should be the right of every American. If an individual in this country can self-produce and fairly distribute fuels or energy sources without exploiting any person or natural habitat, this too should be on the “free markets” and a part of today’s growing local economies. When I talk about local economies, I am referring to: farmers markets; Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) and food co-operatives; restaurants that use locally and ethically grown vegetables, meat and dairy products; artist boutiques filled with a range of hand-made items and recycled clothes; local breweries; community bike shops; housing cooperatives, compost collectives, rainwater harvesting collectives and so on! All of these groups and practices can help to ensure the sustainability of communities. Instead, it is illegal in most states to run your own veggie-oil-powered vehicle. If caught, you can receive a heavy fine for “not paying fuel tax” because you didn’t fill up at the pump. It’s illegal to unplug from your town’s heavily

controlled power grid and independently produce your own energy. As well, it is illegal in some states to harvest your own rainwater. Recent legislation in Colorado allows limited collection and use of precipitation from residential property rooftops. The regulations which prevent people from becoming self-sustainable are staggering and put in place by the corporations who refuse to unbind us from their destructive practices. Every American needs to ask themselves: How are corporations legally allowed to pollute our air and water so heavily that cancer rates are out of control, and then not be held accountable to cover our health care? How is our country so divided on the health of our planet that it’s the “crazy leftists” who are fighting for change? Can the wealthiest 1% really be as convincing to their underclassmen as to imply that it’s all worth it, that we should all want to ravage the planet for individual consumption and ultimately—greed? Is MTV brain-washing our society so intensely that people of all ages have lost their connection with the natural world and the hundreds of species that are being sacrificed for our material growth? Have terms such as “endangered species” become so commonplace that Americans have no concept of what is at risk? How depressing is the reality of our lives that it’s easier and more fulfilling to ignore the signs than to feel empowered to engage with them? Those of us who that want to unplug and be able to have the choice to live a life

less destructive to our planet are heavily outnumbered. Our battle is uphill and without government handouts. We meet and organize; we research and educate; we donate our time to our communities and important causes because we don’t “need” to sit on our asses watching TV or spending time at the mall; we donate our money because we can live moderately instead of excessively; we produce our own media so that the truth can exist wherever Fox News is deafening minds; we ride our bikes as our main form of transportation and organize critical mass to flex our numbers; we are learning how to produce our own food and choose to share food gathered through donations and dumpster runs in support of the abundance that exists; we demonstrate at our capitols and municipals; and every once in awhile we revolt—when situations become so devastating that our families are dying and we can’t afford to pay the bills. We are the agents of change, empowered by all of those who have resisted before us and continue to resist the globalization and militarization of our planet today. In search of solidarity in our resistance to earth-destructive lifestyles we find that during every decade, there have been popular uprisings where thinkers and doers denounce the actions of their government, turning to themselves and their communities for new, alternative ideas. Those organizing for autonomy are often indigenous communities or those inspired by the ways of natives—the people of the

world who survived without the system our government has installed and obsessively regulates. We’ve looked to the communities that have held discussions and organized based on their collective decision-making processes; sought their sovereignty and survive today because they rose up. Those searching have also looked to mythology and folklore and into the campfire to find a way of living that made them proactive about their desire to live a more self-sustainable life. Fortunately, the information is in abundance when you start searching. For those of us seriously working towards sustainability and autonomy in our communities, it is, of course, a road still full of bumps and dips. Collectives and cooperatives across the world continue to evolve and have some big hurdles to jump before we can successfully cut the ties our government presses upon us, while demanding we pick up the tab with our tax dollars to pay for their wars, their military, their dependency on oil and coal and their complete waste of the world’s water. While we constantly strive toward collective goals—and learn how to live cooperatively in non-hierarchical societal archetypes—we are still driven by some inherent qualities of the current state of capitalistic and industrial-

based economics and the emotional crutches that are interconnected to this unbalanced upbringing. We are individuals, full of quirky characteristics that make the feat all the more complicated. For example, the person who is the most skilled carpenter may have great difficulty explaining how to use a power tool or build a project. For us, skill sharing, group dynamics and positive communication are, what we consider to be, key components of a collective. They are treated with caution and care. We thank the collectives of the world, past and present! Especially those who went on to tell the tale of how it all happened, those who pushed their ideas and talents as far as they could soar—allowing them to blossom into something that is truly sustainable and alive today! The independent producers of food, music, arts and crafts, herbal medicines, and so forth, ‘cause it’s not all that easy to live on the fringe and make it all up as you go. The more collectives that form and work on the process of living autonomously, with consensusbased decision-making processes, compassion and self-sustainability at the heart of its existence, the closer we are to making it work, last, and influence the next generation of diggers.

Poem

pornography nancy stohlman Porno

Graphy

Porno

Graphy

Porno

Graphy

Porno

Graphy

Porno

Graphy

Porno

Pornography is a form of discrimination based on sex Pornography is the sexually explicit subordination of women, graphically depicted, whether in pictures or in words that also contains one or more of the following:

Graphy Pornography is the explicit artistic depiction of men and/or women as sexual beings “Explicit” excludes such areas as women’s romance novels.

1: Women are presented as dehumanized sexual objects, things or commodities The word “artistic” distinguishes pornography from psychological or political analysis of sex, which might be graphic. 2: Women are presented as sexual objects who enjoy pain and humiliation 3: Women are presented as sexual objects who

experience pleasure at being raped

The term “depiction” includes a wide range Of expression, from paintings to literature To videos, while excluding live sex acts. 4: Women are presented as sexual objects tied up or cut up and mutilated or bruised or physically hurt Pornography is the genre of art or literature that focuses on the sexual nature of human beings. 5: Women are presented in postures of sexual submission or sexual servility, including by inviting penetration. This does not mean that pornography cannot present people as full, well-rounded human beings or have secondary themes that are non-sexual. 6: Women’s body parts—including but not limited to vaginas, breasts, and buttocks—are exhibited, such that women are reduced to those parts. But in order for the piece of art to be pornography, it must explicitly emphasize sexuality and not just include it as a secondary component. 7: Women are presented as whores by nature. 8: Women are presented being penetrated by objects or animals. In 1966, The National Organization of Women (NOW) was founded, and it explicitly defended the right to pornography and prostitution. 9: Women are presented in scenarios of degradation, injury, abasement, torture, shown as filthy or inferior, bleeding, bruised, or hurt in a context that makes these conditions sexual. Pornography is violence against women.

The argument is for freedom of speech, a woman’s right to choose, and the validity of women’s sexual contracts. Exploiting women for profit is not “freedom of speech”. Selling our children’s innocence is not “freedom of speech”.

And it is our duty to make that known to others as well. Freedom of speech is about expression, not exploitation. Women are coerced into pornography My empirical research into the realities of the industry, which has been extensive, indicates the contrary. If a claim of “coercion into pornography” is proven true, then those who used force or threats to make a woman perform should be charged with kidnapping, assault, and/or rape. Pornography directly leads to the objectification and dehumanization of women. Pornography presents women as objects, sexualized means to gratification. Pornography is not about “sexuality”, it has nothing to do with “sex” at all. Pornography is blatant and utter exploitation, plain and simple. Claim: Women can’t give “real” consent This claim says that women in porn who have not been physically coerced, have been so traumatized by patriarchy that they cannot give real consent. Women in the industry are said to be victims of violence because they are so brainwashed by white male culture that they cannot render consent. They are de facto coerced. Pornography’s influence is not limited to where it is presented. Those who use it are changed by it. It becomes acceptable in their minds for them to treat all women in the way they see the women in the pornography. It becomes “okay” for them to view women as sexual objects. This is more than an attack on the right to pose for pornography. It is a denial of a woman’s right to choose anything that is considered demeaning by some dominant standard. When men treat women as sexual objects, they do not relate to them on a human to human level. They begin to think it is all right for them to say things to them they would never say to a fellow human being. The respect, the camaraderie is lost. So if a woman enjoys performing sex acts in front of a camera, it is not because she is a unique human being who reasons and reacts from a different background or personality. It is not because she has a different definition of what degrading

or humiliating is. No, it is because she is psychologically damaged and no longer responsible for her actions. To say that any woman who poses nude does so only because she has been indoctrinated by patriarchy, is to eliminate the possibility of anyone ever choosing anything. Because women in our society are paid less than men and have fewer opportunities, they are forced to enter unsavory professions in order to make a decent living. Claim: Capitalism forces women into pornography Women go into pornography because they need money. Capitalism is a form of “economic coercion” that forces women into pornography to make a living. Most people enter labor contracts because they need money. If we reject porn contracts because the woman needs money and is influenced by culture, then we are logically constrained to reject many, if not most other labor contracts as well. Because of the semi-legal status of pornography, the contracts of porn actresses— when such exist—are often treated unfairly if brought to court and are often dismissed as “frivolous.” A woman’s consent must never be reduced to a legal triviality. Pornography leads to violence against women. There is a cause and effect relationship between men viewing pornography and men attacking women, especially in the form of rape.

Studies and experts disagree as to whether there is a relationship of any kind between pornography and violence. Though the misogynist pro-pornography advocates

29 insist that the proliferation of pornography that followed the so-called “sexual revolution” should coincide with a reduction in violence against women, The Vancouver Rape Relief & Women’s Shelter tells a different story. Those researchers who draw a relationship between pornography and violence tend to hold one of two contradictory views on what that connection might mean. Larry Baron and Murray Straus (1984) undertook a 50-state correlational analysis of reported rape rates and the circulation rates of eight pornographic magazines: Chic, Club, Forum, Gallery, Genesis, Hustler, Oui, and Playboy. One view is that porn is a form of catharsis. That is, the more pornography we see, the less likely we are to act out our sexual urges. The other view is that pornography inspires imitation. Pornography gives a panoramic view of the world’s sexual possibilities; it allows women to “safely” experience sexual alternatives. Men who view pornography do not limit the objectification to the woman on the screen/magazine. Pornography opens windows so that each woman can interpret sex for herself. They take the image and apply it to all women: your sister, mother, wife, girlfriend, etc. Soon, the object becomes a woman at the office, a co-worker, friend, or neighbor. Pornography benefits women politically. Historically, pornography and feminism have been fellow travelers and natural allies The object becomes you or someone you love. 2: Legitimizing pornography would protect women sex workers, who are stigmatized by our society It is not “okay” for men to view women as sexual objects. Laws directed against pornography or obscenity,

such as the Comstock Law of the 1880’s, have always been used to hinder women’s rights, such as access to birth control information. Pornography is not “okay”. It has begun to proliferate our media, our magazines, our internet, our television. What about our children? They are seeing this too. Do we really want our children growing up in a world like this? Pornography is nothing more or less than freedom of speech applied to the sexual realm. How do you think the children would feel to know how men are viewing their mothers? Their teachers? Their friends? Is this really how we want our world, folks? Pornography is words and images over which the law should exercise no jurisdiction. The law has no business telling women what to do with their own bodies in both producing and consuming pornography. It is a woman’s body, it is a woman’s right. It is time for us to take responsibility for our actions - for what we have allowed to happen in this world. It is time for us to take a stand to change it. We cannot stand idly by and watch things get worse and worse. Pornography is hurting us, and it is hurting our children. Every woman has to discover for herself what is unacceptable. Every woman has to act as her own censor, her own judge of what is appropriate or degrading. Porno Graphy Pnroo

Ghparg

Onrop

Yhparg Onrop

Yhparg

Onrop

Yhparg Onrop

Yhparg

You are powerful

You are beautiful You are sexual *Text based on Wendy McElroy’s essay “Pornography”

ejaculating jealousy

Poem

aimee herman It is a Saturday in September and all I can think about is sperm. As a child, I was told that if I drank enough milk each day, my bones would grow tall and strong. If I flossed between my teeth every morning and night, my gums would be healthy, and cavities would be a stranger to me. If I wished for something hard enough, maybe it would come true. Now I am all grown up, and I do my best to eat well and take care of this body that is with me until I am gone. It should be no mystery or surprise to me that no matter how many pounds of spinach I eat or gallons of milk I drink, I will never produce sperm. I will not wake up one Wednesday in November and find that I have dripped sperm from inside me into my underwear. I will never masturbate alone in my bed and notice the aftermath of the hard work I just engaged in. I will never prematurely ejaculate. Because of this, and for several other reasons, I have become severely jealous of semen. I never use the pull out method. I thrust my clit as far as I can into my girlfriendâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s vagina and leave it there, allowing all my female juices to flow inside her. We do not use a condom, and neither of us practice any form of birth control. We are not careful. I try every time we have sex. I think about Tallulah with red, curly hair to match mine with big, blue eyes and freckles borrowed from my girlfriendâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s genes. I think about going for walks with tiny Tallulah on my back as my girlfriend sings songs about fireflies or the ocean. I want to get her pregnant. Or, at least I want the option or the capability to make

it happen. I want sperm. I want to have an accidental baby. I want our cells to collide to create a new life with lungs and ribs and eyes and fingernails. So, what can I eat or how many sit-ups should I do each day or what types of vitamins must I be ingesting in order to make some sperm inside me? Tell me. Tell me. Please? There was a time during my twenties when I decided to experiment with my sexuality. I dated a man. My mother was very confused. I must admit I was too. It was my first time physically engaging with someone of the opposite sex. I worried people were going to stare at me when we kissed in public. Or, laugh and point when we held hands while walking. I feared that they would see us together in love and throw bible phrases in our direction and hateful slurs. No one ever did. This man that I dated came with his own sperm. I was slightly resentful, though never told him of this. He had so much power. We had sex together and yet, he always got to sign his name at the end. Sperm is like a fancy signature at the bottom of a really important document. I may have written most of the words, but he claimed it all as his own in the end. Our relationship didn’t last very long because, well, I’m gay. But it was during this time that I got to experience what it was like to worry about becoming pregnant. During the course of our relationship, I must have purchased at least ten pregnancy tests. I always thought I was pregnant because we weren’t careful. Because he was allergic to latex and everything that condoms were apparently made from. Because maybe deep down I wanted to experience one of the many luxuries of being straight.

I never got pregnant. We broke up, and that was the last time my partner came with sperm. I haven’t experimented in that way since.

33 I have a really good imagination. When I was younger, I had four imaginary friends: Chi-Chi, Lillian, LuLu, and Stanley. We played together in a world where trees lifted out of their roots, and the sky could turn upside down and become a place where feet could walk. I still believe that if I want something bad enough, I will get it. I

want

sperm.

It seems unfair to watch others around me get pregnant—planned or accidental— while I stand beside my girlfriend on the sidelines. There will always be a lot of planning involved. When, and if, we are ready, we will go shopping for sperm. Learn about the containers they came in and pick which one sounds best. Harvard education. Six feet tall. Blond hair. An artist. We decide. Or, select a child that is in need of adoption. Waiting and ready for a home that is warm and full of love. Like ours. There will never be a night when I am beside my partner, limbs intricately tangled together, where we wonder if this is the time. The sheets will be confused beneath us and tossed to the floor. We will be sweaty because there is always lots of sweat when you work hard enough. There will be candles and soft music like Enya. No. There will be a disco ball above us projecting little, square images of light, and Prince will be playing. Purple Rain. Purple Rain. I will be out of breath, of course. She will be smiling. We both will be smiling. I’ll touch her belly and it will already protrude a bit because my sperm will be so potent—superhero—Batman sperm—that we will already see the effects. It will be beautiful and magical. A perfectly serendipitous occasion. But, there is no Prince playing in the background. Or, maybe there is, but it’s just not the same. We will never have an accident. I’m still doing my research. Asking around. Searching for herbs to enter into my diet that may make my wish come true. We can practice, which can be fun and

exciting, yet also realistic. I love being a woman. I value all my parts: my curves, breasts, thighs, hips, my clitoris, my uterus, my all-encompassing vagina. But, itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s just not the same.

So, I wait. Dream of a body that will produce sperm. My body. My sperm. Hope that my imagination is big enough, deep enough, that maybe it will happen. For us. For any woman in search of her own internal wishing well of sperm.

notes on socially engaged writing:

interview

An interview with Juan Felipe Herrera

rebecca diaz

inner of the 2009 PEN/Beyond the Margins Award for Half of the World in Light and winner of the 2008 PEN/West Award for outstanding poetry in 187 Reasons Mexicanos Can’t Cross The Border, Juan Felipe Herrera is breathing new life into poetry and art for social change. With more than 21 books in the last ten years, Herrera holds the Tomás Rivera Endowed Chair in Creative Writing at the University of California Riverside. Herrera is an actor, writing plays for children and young adults. He is interested in poetry, poetry operas, dance theatre, and painting. He is a Chicano renaissance man. Herrera’s vision, his way of seeing and feeling has given us artifacts, pieces of art that serve a purpose – they teach, instruct, and awaken the consciousness of the reader; placing her/him through time, culture, specificities of land, and through all his poetic faculties used in building the socially engaged poem. Herrera and I began emailing one another in September and through these emails the following interview came to be. Herrera is a kind, generous man willing to share his wisdom; traveling the road of artist-activist, he is a community arts leadership builder with youth-at-risk and Photo Courtesy of Michael J. Elderman migrant communities. In any activist campaign, the first step is to educate; Juan Felipe Herrera has set the stones in place for others to move into their own form of action, of social engagement, and poetic activism.

Rebecca Diaz: Is there anything specific you can name as the reason you started paying attention to the things around you and began writing about them? Juan Felipe Herrera: I am an only child, so my life began as a keen listener and avid observer. And since my mother, Lucha, was a great story-teller, I was packed with things to say at an early age. Then, my temperament, as an emotional child and as a smoldering teen propelled me to speak and perform – in order to explode all that I had been carrying for many years. Also, I love open-air life, movement, landscapes, people, nature, and art. So, there is never a dull moment. RD: Can you talk a little about the writers and activists who have inspired your work both on and off the page? JFH: Writers, writing, letters, designs, textures, and materials have always excited, moved, and inspired me. The wilder and most rebellious the better, since high school – Pasternak, Sartre, Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Krishnamurti were early, Artaud, Ferlinghetti, Zen and Ginsberg followed. Malcolm X., Cesar Chavez, Ghandi, Reis Lopez Tijerina, Luis Valdez, Dolores Huerta. And various student movements and Latin American movimientos. The EZLN has been a most inspiring development in particular its indigenous base. RD: Do you think writing and social engagement must go hand in hand in order to be effective in raising the consciousness of the reader? JFH: Writing is social engagement. What raises consciousness is consciousness, writing is second or third. Sincerity is most powerful. It is a tricky and subtle thing when we think about our writing as a change-agent. There are great possibilities and there are many pit-falls. The social-change writer has quite a bit to consider. RD: The New York Times claims that since the 60’s, artists have tried to create a “new hybrid” form of art, which is “part oral, part written, part English, part something else: an art grounded in ethnic identity, fueled by collective pride, yet irreducibly individual too.” New York Times also claims that you are one of the first to succeed in creating a new hybrid art. What experiences as a writer, a Chicano, and an activist can you point to that allow for this success?

JFH: Every step of the way is connected to a thousand steps. Without others, without nature, without the good will of others, without the generations before us, and those around us, there is no movement forward. I am thankful to all. Many close to me set the example, my parents, my various communities, students, friendships, arts and

social change groups and challenges most of all, failures, detours, disappointments.

RD: In some of your poems, there are very interesting choices in spelling, such as “Chican@” and “Amerika” and in some pieces you write out “Viet Nam” and in others you write “Vietnam.” What were the thoughts behind these spellings? Could you explain how small things like this work as a form of activism? JFH: Sometimes my spelling is off too. Also, it is good to disassemble the usual ways of writing, listening, reading, day-to-day mundane awareness, so we can create something alert and enjoy it, and others too. Writing is electric, so when we upset the wiring of the language, spelling, sound, rhythm, unexpected things happen. Freedom pops up and people feel free. That is good. In the Chican@ literary movement, [Alberto Baltazar Urista Heredia ] Alurista was a pioneer in this area. Most people may not know his concerns and performance experiments on sound, tone and musical keys. Cecilia Vicuña, the Chilena poet artist, is also expert at this. Alfred Arteaga, who recently passed away, is another surgeon of the term and language within language. RD: Octavio Paz said, “The history of Mexico is the history of a man [or woman] seeking his [or her] parentage, his [or her] origins.” In your hybrid style of writing, Spanish and English work together, build off of one another, creating a space for those struggling with the cultural amalgamations that make up this part of the United Sates. How do you see art, poetry, and fiction working to claim identities? JFH: We can claim identities and we can also let them go. Both are very interesting. It is also quite something to experience both and who and what we are in-between the two spaces of social identity. There is so much historical baggage trapped in identity formations. The 60’s – 70’s saw a lot identity invention, then came irony and performance. Now, in the 21st Century identity is dangerous since nationally and globally we have set up institutions of surveillance and security. So there is a battle between Hard and Soft identities. There is no room for Loose identities, in-between ones. So, art has a new role, perhaps – to counter the surveillance machine more than to re-claim the social entity. At another level, the more we express ourselves in new ways, in more authentic and innovative ways, and personally profound ways, the more social, linguistic and life space we create for ourselves and others in terms of being Chican@s. As Arteaga says in his groundbreaking book, Chicano Poetics, “When we begin to think about Chicano space, we begin to erase national borders.” This is a powerful thing to consider and act upon immediately. Sound-knowledge in motion creates social, cultural, historical and political territories and openings across established border work. This is extremely significant for Chican@s since we are always dealing with borderizations regarding our homelands, families and selves (as

Anzaldua stated in the mid 80’s). RD: In your work there are many pieces focused on people (“Senorita X: Song for the Yellow Robed Girl from Juarez”), culture (“187 Reasons Mexicanos Can’t Cross the Border”), and historical events (“Love After The Riots”). They are written with conviction and insight which allows the reader to grow by the time they have finished reading each piece. Denise Levertov talks about not using the page as a platform or a soapbox, and you seem to have that quality in your poems. Are there any specific guidelines you follow in order to “marry the Muse happily to politics” and social issues while educating the reader in a way that is not off puttingly didactic? JFH: I love Levertov. I let the words move me and move out of me. Sometimes I feel and see and sense the entire poem, as in the ones you mention – and there is not time for extra considerations other than to write. Most of my work is like that. Levertov wants a balance between poetic music, line, stanza, enjambment, caesura and society more than an over-emphasis on social conflicts without ample considerations for the text. And she wants attention to the “inscape” of poetry, its deep sources. “Soap box” poetry tends to focus more on “outscape.” RD: There is a lot of discussion around another genre of writing, poetry and fiction which hold a place between two borders, two cultures, and two languages, building bridges on the page. How do you see this sort of cultural hybridism working on the page and in your community? JFH: All is good. As long as we avoid the problems that can lead to cult writing. Sometimes we get too caught up with being Hybrid (after late 60’s and mid 80’s, after Alurista and Anzaldúa, in particular) or in vogue or culturally complex and that’s when we loose whatever we had going. Of course, all this has happened to me. At another level, most writing and art today is hybrid, there is no way back to singular monuments and narratives, for the moment. In some other ways, the Page is Dead. Anzaldúa proposed many things – the reclaiming of culture, indigenous Chicanisma, lesbian empowerment, Latina shamanism, linguistic multiplicity and more. We must go beyond superficial approaches to her explorations and thought, for example an over-emphasis on symbols, images and rituals. This was also true for Alurista’s early proposals regarding indigenous knowledge systems. RD: How do you feel about being called the “Chicano Ginsberg” and having your work compared to his?

JFH: I have lifetimes to reach Ginsberg. A free human being is hard to find. Ginsberg

39 was focused and more daring. Ginsberg, however, is a good study for us since he is a key example of merging poetry with social change through an intense and joyful mix of art, music, photography, writing, performance, and travel – his reach was personal, collective, local, national and global – all at once. A sacred, wild, gay, clown-seerRabbi, if I may use those words. RD: What advice do you give to young aspiring writers and activists trying to create change in the world? JFH: Write, breathe, be kind, generous – live in simplicity. Write for small reasons; write without reasons, for impossible reasons. Take in the stories of the people without being pushy, share them easily. Tell your story honestly, most of all. Listen to everyone. Write alone. Then sit back and laugh a little, listen to trees and traffic. Take yourself seriously, then be a jester, throw it all away. Then start over. Be a brilliant beginner always. Deep activism requires study, listening, self-reflection and spontaneous and sustained personal connections more than invasive good-will through language. Think of Cesar Chavez who just knocked on shanty doors in a simple shirt and old khakis under the blistering sun. RD: Will our families ever find the gold bars buried in Mexico? JFH: Yes, the day you become a poet. Actually, they already brought them over and turned them into Pan Dulce. The women turned them into stories. Their children turned them into fire, and some into Yoga in Colorado.

Art

may day

brian funk

Art

bad astronaut joey strine

Essay

letter to the editor: melanie pitnick Pirating Our Privacy

n the six months I have been living at CU Boulder, I have come to realize that campus security is inflicting unfair treatment upon freshmen. Supposedly, the main job of campus security officers is to ensure safety in the residence halls after the Resident Advisors (RAs) have finished patrolling their buildings. However, it seems as though security is trying to go out of their way to get students into trouble by hiding around corners, smelling door cracks, and looking through peepholes for movement. Instead of looking for outside predators or preventing harmful situations from occurring, they seem to prefer sneaking about, looking for any excuse to cite students for minor campus violations. Such an attitude on the part of security hinders students’ ability to feel free and enjoy themselves. Students are living in fear of being written up and kicked out of housing because of rule violations. Two infractions, whether as serious as an alcohol or marijuana violation, or as miniscule as a noise complaint, can terminate a student’s housing contract, according to the policies laid out by my RA when I moved into the dorms. My concerns are the result of numerous first-hand encounters with security, with one night in particular that stands out. At around 11:00 PM about a month ago, two friends and I were sitting around in a dorm room watching a movie on TV when we heard a knock at the door. The person who lived in the room got up to look through the peephole in the door, but saw no one there. About a minute later, a knock occurred again. This time he opened the door to find two members of campus security standing there. They proceeded to search the room, claiming they suspected we were smoking marijuana. After a thorough search of the room, they found only a shot glass and an old water bottle with some residual alcohol in it. The next words we heard were, “Buff One Cards, please.” Luckily, I ended up avoiding a violation because I had no knowledge of the alcohol and no one was smoking. However, this miniscule slip-up could have ended my schooling for supposedly violating the rules. Earlier in the year, I had received two other violations, both alcohol related, for which I took responsibility: I enrolled

in an alcohol-awareness program through Wardenburg Health Center and performed many hours of community service. Even so, this latest infraction would have been my third write-up, which would have resulted in me being kicked out of the dorms and suspended from school. Having learned from these past mistakes, I made sure to never be around any alcohol inside the residence halls again. These types of incidents occur too often. Campus security will enter a room on suspicion of one type of violation, search the room, find nothing to justify their entering the room, and then charge a student with an unrelated violation having nothing to do with their original justification for disturbing the dorm resident. Having discussed my concern with other residents, I found that incidents

like this occur all too frequently. One student said that in the middle of the night before a final, he was woken up by pounding on the door. Half asleep, the student opened the door; campus security came in and said the room smelled like marijuana. They searched everything very thoroughly, going through every drawer and closet, but found nothing. It seems like campus security is profiling rooms and using false charges to justify entering student rooms as a form of intimidation. Security is going overboard in performing their perceived duties and not patrolling for the right reason, which is to preserve student safety and security. When kids are getting written up in the middle of the night when they should be resting for an exam and kicked out of college for having remnants of alcohol that might not even be theirs, it is time for a change to be made.

Art

camdombe drummers 44

brian funk

water rights charlie simpkin

Art

giving of the gift

anne robertson

Art

Essay

by any means necessary: sean daly Political Repression of Academia at The University of Colorado at Boulder Academia as the Last Fortress of Free Thought :

ne of the lasts bastions of freedom lies in the public university. If there is any institution in American society that ought to support freedom of speech, it is the academy. Public universities are intended to be the guardians of truth, objectivity, and reason. It follows then that academics retained in public universities should be hired and fired based on objective peer-reviewed processes, not political litmus tests. Public universities are the last line of defense in any battle of ideas. They serve an important function in society by creating a place for critical questioning and inquiry that may not be popular within society. Academics should be free to express and debate ideas on any and all ranges of issues – censored or endorsed only by more speech from their intellectual peers. Academic freedom protects all legitimate scholarship, both critical and laudatory. Without academic freedom at public universities, there may be no secure place for free speech in public anywhere. Unfortunately on today’s campuses critical thought is relegated to research and political action is thought to somehow violate one’s capacity for objectivity. What follows is a historical analysis and synthesis of striking instances of oppression and repression of speech related activities. The purpose is not to compare the oppression of academics with other sectors of society, but rather to merely describe the historical context for the witch hunt of left-wing academics. While it is commonly believed that freedom of speech for citizens of the United States is protected and enshrined in the First Amendment of the Constitution, rather than protecting freedom of speech, the government is often its worst enemy. Historically, freedom of speech in the United States has been more of a privilege than a right. To paraphrase Mark Twain, the nineteenth century writer, in America

everybody has the right to say what they believe, and nobody is stupid enough to try. Repression of Academic Freedom through the 1950s : As academic freedom and tenure developed slowly throughout history it met resistance along the way. One of the first documented cases of an American professor being clearly fired for his politics was in the progressive era: 1895. Edward Bemis, a political economist professor at the University of Chicago was under scrutiny because he sided with a railroad union. The university’s primary funder was J.D. Rockefeller. The president of the University of the Chicago intervened, and as a preconfiguration of the trumped up charges that would be used in the twenty-first century against professors, the economist was cited by the administration for failure to adhere to the scientific method as the basis for his firing. Many progressive professors were fired across the nation by antipopulist administrations. Moving on to the twentieth century, we encounter the first era of the Red Scare. Like that of the 1950s, the Red Scare of the 1910s was a program of overt government oppression and right-wing extremism, such as the well-known case of Sacco and Vanzetti. The Red Scare was intensified by the U.S. Sedition Act of World War I. This act led to massive imprisonments and forced deportation, often for nothing more than otherwise

lawful anti-draft rallies. Many anti-war professors were kicked out of their posts in academia, most notably Scott Nearing and Carl Haessler. Left-wing academics were under attack again. At the University of Colorado at Boulder, the Knights of the Klu Klux Klan (KKK) came on the coat-tails of the Red Scare. After 1915 the KKK had been reformed and was especially influential in the state of Colorado and was enmeshed in the State Legislature. Not only demonizing African-Americans, the Klan focused a great deal of their attacks on Italian immigrants and Jews. The Ku Klux Klan demanded the dismissal of Jewish faculty. However, President Norlin stood up for academic freedom, and as a credit to his principles, went so far as to refuse to back down even after state funds were pulled from the university. The university survived its first threat to academic freedom in Boulder with honor. While the Great Depression of the 1930s created an environment somewhat more open to leftist ideas, World War II reversed this trend and thus began a new era of political repression. The 1940s and 50s saw the era of Joseph McCarthy lead a second Red Scare. McCarthy used the House Committee on Un-American Activities to target leftist dissent. Just as communism was perceived as an international threat, the McCarthy Era impulse was to root out so-called subversives everywhere. During this period, academics around the country were under attack.

Professors were forced to resign or testify before the House Committee be dismissed. F.O. Mathheisson, a on Un-American Activities, but only prominent literary scholar at Harvard in about himself. He refused to accuse the 1930s, was ousted due to his politics other faculty. Unlike other professors, and for being gay, and was black listed. Hawkins then received the support of As a result he killed himself. The Red the president. With the support of the Scare of the 1950s was more overt yet president and his tenured status, Hawkins also more insidious – while still firing its was able to retain his job. Morris Judd victims in academia, targeted professors was not as lucky as David Hawkins and now faced blacklisting discrimination. did not have the protection afforded By the 1950s, the sentiments of the by tenure. Just a year earlier he ran for administration at Boulder were not as Congress as a Democratic candidate. idealistic about academic freedom as Although Judd was never a communist, they seemed to have been in the 1920s. he refused to testify on principle. He There was enormous pressure from the was fired, blacklisted, and never got Rocky Mountain News and the Denver another teaching job. He later moved to Post for investigations, loyalty oaths, and Greeley and managed a junkyard. The trials. The newspapers listed names of travesty was finally officially recognized professors to be targeted. The role of by CU in 2002. the newspapers of the 1950s also preThings got slightly better with figured the role that they would play in President Darly in 1953. Although targeting professors at CU in the first the university had no official change decade of the twenty-first century. In in policy, E.U. Condon of the physics fact, the change was so complete that department tried to hire blacklisted rather than protect their employees, professors. Professor George Reynolds the administration led the attack, as fought a campaign against loyalty oaths, it would again fifty years later. Unlike and a Boulder library is now named after the five other top universities and him. Though their administration lacked colleges in Colorado at the time, the moral courage, many of the faculty did university’s President Sterns and the not. Board of Regents commissioned the To add insult to injury, in memory Hutchinson-Hafer report from two FBI of the 1950s, we now have an odd lawyers to investigate their own faculty memorial on campus. Today, the for communist links, in conjunction with University Memorial Center (UMC) the governor’s request. fountain area is officially refereed to in A number of professors were attacked Orwellian terms as the only “free speech at CU. The first on the block was zone” on the campus of this public renowned philosopher David Hawkins. university. Ironically, it is named after To save his job, Hawkins agreed to Dalton Trumbo, one of the Hollywood

10, who was only at CU for two years, and not during the era of McCarthyism. His case had nothing to do with CU Boulder. Truly honoring the spirit of free speech, the campus could have named the fountain for any one of the professors who were actually involved with their university’s dealings in McCarthyism and free speech in Boulder at the time. Of course doing so would mean revisiting the convoluted and sometimes dastardly dealings of the administration at the time. The Age of Neo-McCarthyism: Today, repression is happening again at universities and colleges. We are in an era dubbed “Neo-McCarthyism.” Due to the growing role of corporations in academia, and conservative takeover and of the governing bodies at most major universities around the nation, there has been a resurgence McCarthy style rhetoric. At first there was a call for “intellectual diversity,” by which conservative activists mean having a balanced proportion of Democrats and Republicans in academia, as if somehow the two political parties where the only institutions that have objective measures of truth to political questions. Individual professors were also targeted. David Horowitz, wellknown conservative activist, released a book titled The Professors : The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America, three of whom where at CU Boulder. The American Council of Trusties

and Alumni (ACTA), a conservative advocacy group chaired by Lynn Cheney, went on the attack against individual professors, and released a report entitled How Many Ward Churchills? The report claims that other dangerous professors are still lurking in academia today. The most chilling effect has been the purging of freethinking or “dangerous” faculty. Unlike the 1950s, academic freedom in the form of tenure has been protected to a greater degree by the legal system. Recently, several instructors claim to have been fired or dismissed on trumpedup charges or without comment. For some, they claim it was for criticizing Israel’s policies in Palestine, such as Denis Rancourt in Ottawa, Joel Kovel at Bard College, Sami Al-Arian at USF. However, not for Israel-related comments, but general radicalism, David Graeber, a social anthropologist instructor at Yale, was also dismissed in 2007. There has been a general stifling of critical voices on college campuses in North America in the last few years. The attack on academic freedom in Boulder in recent years is not an isolated incident. Here in Boulder the university has once-again led the charge against academia. Professors and instructors have been recently fired or dismissed. For example, in 2005, the university took the opportunity to benefit from the Ward Churchill distraction and not renew the contract of an extremely popular instructor in CU’s environmental studies program, Adrienne Anderson. Though

not tenured, Adrienne Anderson repeatedly annoyed the Coors Corporation and Lockheed Martin, two of the largest contributors to CU Boulder (at the time there was a $20 million bid on the table for a research laboratory by Lockheed Martin). A former activist and Colorado Water board member, she worked teaching courses which, among other things, gave her students the knowledge of how to look through government records and how to do testing projects to investigate real environmental violations, rather than read about them. She and her students often revealed frightening information about extensive illegal toxic and radioactive dumping and pollution in the Front-Range area. On one occasion, when a whistle-blower from Lockheed Martin was aided by Adrienne Anderson in revealing documents that large amounts of rocket fuel waist had been illegally dumped in the city of Denver, Governor Bill Owens put pressure on the university to fire Anderson. Because Anderson did not have tenure, her courses were merely discontinued, despite the fact that they were some of the most popular in the program. Ostensibly, the department claims that it wanted to change its focus to courses on eco-tourism. Ward Churchill vs. CU: However, the case of Ward Churchill is important because it is a well-publicized attack on a tenured professor, not just an instructor. Just

before the case of Adrienne Anderson, the case of Ward Churchill hit the news media. At the time, Churchill was the most cited scholar within the field of American Indian Studies. He won the CU Alumni’s association most popular professor of the year award, though he was later denied this reward without explanation. Churchill was attacked for his little-known yet morally charged essay “On the Justice of Roosting Chickens.” The comment that some who worked in the buildings that were attacked were “like so many little Eichmanns” was not a metaphor, but a simile. Unlike a metaphor, which unless it is used in hyperbole, is direct and equivalent, a simile is a figure of speech that compares two unlike things, and can express rough degrees of measure. Churchill said that the technocrats are to U.S. foreign policy a little version of what Adolf Eichmann was to the policy of Nazi Germany. It is not a direct comparison of moral equivalence. However, even if Churchill had said something more controversial, and he probably had at some point in his life, he still had the right to do so. The story of the essay broke four years after its publication, in 2005. In response to the essay, the governor, the Rocky Mountain News, Fox News, and even the Boulder City Counsel called for Churchill’s dismissal, threatening to cut funding to the university. Interim Chancellor DiStefano announced that CU would launch an investigation into every word Churchill has ever written or

spoken. Shortly afterwards, the Rocky Mountain News started surfacing charges of academic fraud from a lone complainant, many of which had previously been examined and dismissed by the university ten years before because they were viewed as scholarly debate. Nevertheless, President Hank Brown and Interim-Chancellor Phil DiStefano took charges verbatim from the newspaper, and sent them in emails to the Standing Committee on Research Misconduct (SCRM). After nearly a year of “investigation” into alleged misconduct the SCRM committee published a 124 page report. Charges of academic plagiarism were announced as a clever rationalization for terminating Churchill. Masked by its sheer size, the report only alleged a handful of charges. Immediately after the reports publication a group of CU professors and professors from other universities filed charges that the SCRM report itself contained plagiarism, falsifications, and deliberate attempts to conceal the truth. As it turns out, if one carefully analyzes the charges asserted by the SCRM committees, they find trivial charges all of which allegedly occurred during a brief period during the early 1990s, before Churchill was even a full professor – working a guidance counselor at CU. Churchill’s work was then examined before the Privilege and Tenure Committee, which dismissed several charges and recommended only suspension, not termination. Nevertheless, the president, Hank

Brown, presented his recommendation for termination to the Board of Regents, including charges that Privilege and Tenure had considered illegitimate. The Board of Regents voted for Termination 8 to 1. In 2009 CU went on trial. Churchill sued CU and the Board of Regents for violating his freedom of speech. After four long weeks of trial where each of the five remaining charges of plagiarism were examined in detail and arguably debunked by the plaintiff, a jury of six unanimously found that were it not for his 9/11 comments, Churchill would not have been fired, and that his firing was a violation of his First Amendment rights. However, the jury had a holdout who refused to reward damages, arguing that Churchill brought the trouble upon himself. The jury only awarded $1 in damages as a compromise to appease the holdout juror and not to have a mistrial. In a surprising turn of events, Judge Lary Naves (a CU law school alumnus) overturned the jury’s verdict, refusing to instate Churchill based upon the supposed immunity of the CU Board of Regents as a quasi-judicial body. Churchill is in the process of appealing the verdict. If appellate courts rule that Judge Naves’ interpretation of quazijudicial immunity applies to public universities, then administrations will be given a free hand to censor even tenured professors for speech, so long as they use this allegedly established method to do so. The Ward Churchill case is extremely important, determining whether or not

the last bastion of free speech – that of public universities – shall still protect the right of freedom of speech of tenured professors from attacks which are sophisticated and complex, but still essentially vacuous and motivated by bias.

Art

the dock

anne robertson

Art

alternative ways to use an AK-47

aaron young

dear reader

hough the staff is concerned with a common set of issues, we are a group of individuals all the same. Our opinions regarding activist issues differ, and our aesthetic taste is similarly varied. The views expressed in the essays, poems, paintings, and photographs in this journal are not necessarily representative of the opinions of every staff member of contributor. Given the heterogeneous nature of the BASE staff, the pieces included in this publication were selected by majority vote. Staff members were assigned to read every submission, and our selection meetings consisted of long discussions concerning the merits and relevance of all the submissions. Arguments for the inclusion of a given piece were encouraged and common. Votes were rarely unanimous, and many strong pieces were left out of the final product due to space. When the discussion turned to a submission by a staff member, that person was asked to leave the room in the interest of preserving honest commentary. With this in mind, we hope you enjoy the journal; the published submissions are as assorted and unique as the opinions of BASE staff members and our contributors. -Staff

want to submit to base? Many people pay out of pocket to get their work published. If selected, we will publish you free of charge! You may submit as many pieces as you wish, however each must fall into one of these categories, as specified. » Essays (max 6 pages single spaced [= 12 pages double spaced] ) » Opinion/Editorials (max 6 pages single spaced) » Photography and Art (b&w or color) » Poetry (max 5 pages, format at discretion of poet) » Current-Event Articles ( max 3 pages single spaced) » Comic Strips (max 2 pages , b&w or color) » Comments (including online comments) Submissions must relate to concerns such as cultural diversity, gender/sexuality, human rights, environmental issues, or other closely-related areas of interest. You do not have to be a CU student to submit. All art must include a by-line description. Art must have a resolution of at least 200px. Email submissions to submissions@activistjournal.com or submissions.activistjournal@gmail.com Fall deadline for submissions to volume 3 is Oct. 31, 2010 (Halloween).

All-volunteer, not-for-profit, progressive bookstore, providing access to alternative viewpoints and difficult-to-obtain sources of information.

1200 Pearl Street (on the mall, down the stairs) 路 Boulder 路 Colorado (303) 443-8252 路 www.lefthandbooks.org