jem@ariel.UUCP (08/30/83)
August 30, 1983
"We still have a dream. Jobs, peace and freedom."
That was the keynote around the Lincoln Memorial in
Washington, D.C. this past Saturday. It was the 20th
anniversary of the civil rights march in which Dr. Martin
Luther King Jr. gave his famous "I have a dream" speech.
When Dr. King gave that speech I was 5 years old and did not
know who he was, or cared for that matter. Twenty years
later I feel that it is time that I did care. So I attended
the march this past Saturday. I went not as a participant
in the march, but as an unbiased, but interested, observer.
I wanted to see and hear the rally first hand, and I wanted
understand what the marchers felt. So I talked with them.
I interviewed Beth, a young white woman. She had been at
the rally since 8:00 am (the march itself didn't start until
many hours later). The adjectives she used to describe the
rally were "peaceful and constructive."
Later on, I interviewed a black man from Ohio, recently
retired from the army, who used adjectives such as "peaceful
and orderly." After talking with him, I talked with Margie,
an older black woman from Atlanta, who described the rally
as "peaceful." Both were "into" the civil rights cause.
Finally, Lieutenant Clements of the U.S. Park Police, gave
me a viewpoint from the "other side of the fence."
Surprisingly enough, he used adjectives such as "calm,
peaceful, nice and laid back."
All of these people had the same basic attitude about the
rally. All used the word "peaceful" in their descriptions.
All have different backgrounds, are of different age, and
have different occupations too, and yet they all felt the
same way about the rally. This commonality is the focus of
this article.
As there were many individuals at the rally, each with
different backgrounds but with similar attitudes that day,
so were many different interest groups represented at the
rally. Many labor unions were there: the AFL/CIO, the UAW,
AFSCME, and the CWA. Many civil rights groups were there
representing the gamut of minorities: blacks, Hispanics,
women, gay/lesbian, elderly, and disabled citizens. These
groups included ERA, SCLC, NAACP, and NOW. Many peace
groups were there advocating nuclear disarmament, and
environmental groups were also there petitioning to increase
protection of our natural resources.
All of these groups had two things in common. All were
rallying around Dr. King's principles and all were
discouraged with Ronald Reagan's administration. Most,
however, were discouraged with Mr. Reagan, and they showed
it by chanting or displaying slogans:
"Ronald Reagan, he's no good. Send him back to Hollywood."
"ERAse Reagan." (From the Equal Rights Amendment
supporters).
"Common Sense is not so common to Reagan."
"Behold the dinosaur
too much armor
too little brain
... extinct"
All these slogans, with their common target, came from very
different sources. One came from a woman's group advocating
gay/lesbian civil rights. Another came from blue collar,
high school educated auto workers. A third came from a
group representing senior citizen's rights.
This is probably the most interesting thing about the whole
rally. Many of the interest groups that were united that
day would normally never associate with each other. On the
contrary, if anything there would be bad feelings between
the groups. I've been to some "blue-collar" taverns where
gay rights is "a passing fad that they talk about in New
York or San Francisco, but not here."
In these same taverns you'll hear comments like "women
should stay home and mind the house, like it was when I grew
up." ERA is an unknown acronym to these men.
But enough of this. I don't want to belabor the point: Dr.
Martin Luther King Jr., that great peace worker of the
sixties, made a positive impression on people from all walks
of life. And the present administration, headed by Mr.
Reagan, has made a negative impression on people from all
walks of life.
It would be nice if I could believe that most of the people
at the rally were there to show their support of the civil
rights movement. That certainly was not the case. It would
also be nice if I could believe that most of the people at
the rally were there to show support of the peace movement.
That again was not the case. If things were better for them
economically, which has little to do with civil rights or
the peace movement, many of the marchers would have been on
the beach or lounging in their backyard by the pool. These
are things that people do on a hot weekend after working all
week. But as it is, the people need jobs, and jobs are a
commodity that just are not available for 10 million people.
Therefore, many thousands of people, instead of lounging
around their backyard pool, were sitting around the
reflecting pool listening to speeches and talking amongst
themselves.
A good question to ask at this time is, "will a new
coalition evolve from this rally?" Unlikely, considering
the diversities of the groups at the rally. These groups,
who may see eye to eye on their dislike for the present
administration, will not come to grips on the multitude of
other issues that were evident at the rally. And that is a
shame.
John E. Modlaeich@uiuccsb.UUCP (09/09/83)
#R:ariel:-43800:uiuccsb:11000007:000:89 uiuccsb!eich Sep 8 18:28:00 1983 Real diverse group there. But didn't you feel the ship listing just a wee bit to port?