Showing posts with label the politics of food. Show all posts
Showing posts with label the politics of food. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 11, 2012

Interview with Dr. Vandana Shiva on sustainability, seed banks, organic agriculture, and spirituality



Uploaded by on Jan 9, 2012

This is what the male interviewer says about the interview:
Dr. Vandana Shiva and I speak on sustainable ecological agriculture and how it relates to the environmental, culture, nationality and spirituality. I was a bit nervous meeting my heroine and kinda sick from the new Indian environment.







Saturday, September 17, 2011

Dr. Vandana Shiva presents "Making Peace With The Earth", in Calgary, Sept. 24, 2011


photo of Vandana Shiva with the Earth, is from here

All that follows is from *here*:
Dr. Vandana Shiva presents "Making Peace with the Earth", Calgary
Saturday, September 24, 2011 - 10:00am - 11:00am 
Location: 
Red & White Club, McMahon Stadium, 1833 Crowchild Trail NW
Contact Name:
Danielle Paydli
Contact Phone:
(306) 242-4097
Contact Email:
Danielle.Paydli@oxfam.ca
URL:
http://www.ucalgary.ca/peacestudies/ShivaSeptemberEvent 
Dr. Vandana Shiva receives 2011 Calgary Peace Prize & presents "Making Peace with the Earth" on Sept 24. Register today
Please join on us Saturday, September 24 at the Red & White Club as Alderman Gian-Carlo Carra & Chancellor Emeritus Joanne Cuthbertson present the 2011 Calgary Peace Prize to Dr. Vandana Shiva, philosopher, environmental activist, eco feminist and author of several books. Her acceptance speech is titled "Making Peace with the Earth".  During this event, organizations and businesses that are involved in peace, social justice, environment, development, women's issues, food policy advocacy and natural health will be presenting and selling their products. Vandana Shiva books will be on sale at this event. Tickets are $12. For tickets, visit the Univeristy of Calgary: http://www.ucalgary.ca/peacestudies/ShivaSeptemberEvent 
Consortium for Peace Studies would like to thank the following organizations and people for supporting/ sponsoring the Calgary Peace Prize 2011: 
Oxfam Canada, Calgary Food Policy, Alberta Food Policy, Slow Food Calgary, Calgary Seedy Saturday, Hugo Bonjean – Author, Community Natural Foods, Planet Organic, Ten Thousand Villages, The Zeitgeist Society of Calgary, The Arusha Centre, River Café, Project Ploughshares, Initiatives of Change, Bullfrog Energy, Sheldon Chumir Foundation, David Swann (Liberal Party), Vogel and Company (lawyers), EPCOR Centre, Green Calgary, Indian Canada Association of Calgary, Shastri Indo Canada Institute, Judy MacLauchlan of UC Senate, Faculty of Social Work at UC, Faculty of Environmental Design at UC, Faculty of Nursing at UC,  Social Work Student Association at UC,  Political Science Students at UC, Eco Club at UC, U of C Student Union

Thursday, July 21, 2011

Dr. Vandana Shiva, Speaking in Chattanooga, TN, USA, 26 April 2011

It is always a breath of fresh air to hear radical ecofeminist Vandana Shiva speak out for justice for the Earth and its citizens.

All that follows is from YouTube. With thanks to gaingroundcha, for posting this.

Uploaded by on Jul 21, 2011
  
On April 26, 2011, environmentalist Dr. Vandana Shiva spoke in Chattanooga as a part of the Benwood Foundation's George T. Hunter Lecture Series. Her speech focused on the environmental issues surrounding industrial agriculture and the solutions our community can focus on to address those issues.

This video was filmed during her 2-day visit to Chattanooga, and features clips from her speech, as well as personal interviews with Dr. Shiva and engaged Chattanooga citizens.

Edited by Linda Duvoisin

Friday, June 17, 2011

Fictional Functional Families, Hugh Hefner, and the Matter of Freedom of Choice

photo of the cast of The Waltons is from here

I watch some very mainstream television. This would be a confession if I thought there was something shameful about doing so, but as I have a television and an internet connection too slow to play video (films), what, honestly, are my choices? Corporate TV is what I get, along with Democracy Now! Today I watched an old episode of The Waltons from one of its last years on the airwaves, when the grandparents, mother, and John-Boy were no longer on the show. The show didn't do as well in the ratings when the extended nuclear family unraveled due to real-life issues like desire to change jobs, illness, and death.

I loved The Waltons. And the person in the program I most identified with was... well, there were two. As an intergender male, one was John-Boy, because he was such a caring, sensitive male. The other was Erin, the next-to-youngest girl, because she was sort of invisible as she wasn't statused by being the oldest or the youngest. (I most identified with Jan Brady in The Brady Bunch, for many of the same reasons.)

As I watched today, I thought about how many television shows I grew up with starred all-white casts, usually Christian ones too. The Waltons, The Brady Bunch, The The Partridge Family, and Little House on the Prairie were among my favorite shows. I soaked in programs that featured fictional functional families, and functional meant white, Christian, and only heterosexual. I was a gay kid living in a Jewish family. What was I supposed to think of myself by wishing I was part of those families?

What were Black and Brown, Asian, and Indigenous children supposed to long for, to feel that displaced sense of belonging to a fictional family demonstrating unconditional love? How do you feel unconditional love if you're not the color of the family you're watching being loving? There were no dramatic series depicting a nuclear-ish family that was Latina, Asian, or Indigenous. There were a few shows featuring Black families, but only situation comedies. I remember hearing Oprah Winfrey describe the effect of seeing a Black family behave affectionately on television. It happened when Claire and Heathcliff Huxtable cuddled on their couch. She was moved to tears, realising she had gone for all her life to that point never seeing this reflected back to her. I could relate to what she was saying, as I was yearning to see a gay couple of any color relate that way in their fictional home. I'm still waiting to see it. I'm sorry Oprah had to wait until the 1980s to see a Black woman and man be sweet to one another on television.


I'll Fly Away was one of the first dramatic program featuring a Black family but they had a supportive role that existed around the world of the main family in the show: a white one. I loved I'll Fly Away too. Regina Taylor was great in a role that didn't give her or her TV family enough air-time.

photograph of Regina Taylor is from here
For those who don't know--and I'm guessing most of you don't--I'll Fly Away was a dramatic series that ran for a couple of years in the early 1990s. Like The Waltons, it was set in the US south. But it took place a couple of decades later, during the Civil Rights struggles. Lilly Harper was the name of a character who, in the story, was hired to work in the home of a widowed white het male lawyer, in part to take care of his three children and also to cook their meals. Occasionally, the storyline took us to her home and life away from the white main characters, especially as her involvement in the Civil Rights movement increased. The lack of central attention on her own life as "more than housekeeper to whites" was not exactly the intention of the show's creators. The network would only support a show that still kept the primary spotlight on white people. From Wikipedia:
Series creators Joshua Brand and John Falsey have stated that the inspiration for the series was the classic 1962 film To Kill a Mockingbird. While the film centers around attorney Atticus Finch and his family, the pair wondered about the life of Calpurnia, the Finches' African-American maid. Her story goes unexplored in the movie. A serious and seemingly well-educated individual who is respected by her employers, Calpurnia is the inspiration for the character Lilly Harper in I'll Fly Away.
We might take a moment to consider what the employment options were for a woman who was the African American and Southern at that time. We can assume becoming President of the US was not possible, no matter how hard she tugged on those bootstraps. Things have changed since then, but not nearly deeply enough. The proportion of Black women in the US who will be filthy rich remains far less than the proportion of white men. A huge reason for that is laws governing inheritance. Most white families keep their money to themselves.

Options for Black women in the US: what they currently? Not for one woman, but for millions?

I'm watching to see how Oprah Winfrey rescues her network (OWN) from low ratings. I believe she will. She knows far too much about television production and how to get and keep high ratings to not be successful with OWN. She's beginning to put out a brand with some new programming featuring troubled celebrities, which allows her to combine her two most popular elements from the talk show that recently finished out a 25-year career. Those two elements are celebrities and emotional well-being. When watching a news story about the Oprah Winfrey talk show ending, a white middle-class woman spoke about how it was her lifeline to reminders that she has a spiritual life, and to not neglect it.

This tells us so much about CRAP--that it is an anti-spiritual, emotionally unhealthy existence, devoted to consuming, exploiting, and surviving by destroying most of what is around us, if not also ourselves. That a television program that reminds us we are spiritual beings having a human experience is a rarity. And those that also remind us we are existing inside truly vile systems of hierarchical oppression are non-existent. This means we don't really understand how those systems work. And, often enough, we deny they exist at all.

But back to emotional well-being for a moment. If you're really privileged, if you control a lot of the conditions of your life--such as by being economically secure, by not living in a shack--as many millions of good people do, by not being subjected to rape and the threat of rape daily and nightly--you might believe what many white class-privileged people believe: that your well-being is yours to determine.

It is partly ours to determine. But it is also determined by forces around and beyond us. Noticing this means we are called, perhaps, to organise and change those forces so they are more humane and just. But corporate television is owned by powerful companies that are invested in destruction of people, animals, and the Earth, and don't want us organising. So they won't tell us about those systems of harm and inhumanity--how they work, what they are designed to do, and so on.

Understanding those systems and structures has been a primary goal of mine for a long time. Since being nine years old, I'd say. At nine I began to see how things were really fucked up socially with regard to race, ethnicity, and gender. Eventually I added sexuality to the list too. Last on for me was economic status and class.

The principles by which we live our lives--our core philosophies for "good living", are structured for us if we are receiving them from corporate television or by authors who promote values that are not going to prevent them from appearing on corporate television to promote their books. Dr. Phil was supported by Oprah Winfrey. He has the most viewed daytime talk show in the US, now that Oprah's show has stopped airing new episodes.

On OWN, I saw him speaking with the former Duchess of York, Sarah Ferguson. She has a reality show detailing her journey towards greater self-awareness and personal emotional healing. She had a rough childhood emotionally but was stable economically. (Her mother left her when she was twelve, and her father was affectionally distant and very emotionally abusive.) Rarely are connections made between economic poverty and emotional distress, I find. People who are poor are assumed, if living in the US, to be able to pull themselves up from their bootstraps and find happiness in the upper middle class world that remains exclusive and exclusionary to most poor people, by design.

When we're told anyone can do something, we might notice we're not told "everyone can do it"--or even "many". We might notice that US society values pursuing happiness, not achieving it--unless you're very privileged. Even then happiness might not be yours, but not having to worry about health care and housing, not having to work three jobs to still not be able to pay your bills and feed your children, goes a long way towards being happy. While a few poor, Black, sexually abused children might be able to grow up, like Oprah, and become rich, not all poor people can. Not all Black people can. Not all sexually abused children can. And they can't not because they can't find their bootstraps. They can't because the capitalist, racist, child-hating systems they live in manufacture poverty, oil companies manufacture ecocide and the pornography industry manufactures contempt for women of all colors.

Being told "you can be whoever you want to be" was spoken a lot as President Obama won the election. What wasn't said is that "If we have one Black president, we won't be able to have another one for a score of years; probably longer." What we're not told is that "You won't be able to be president if you're a woman who is Black, Brown, Asian, or Indigenous. Not even a white Christian woman has been president, although I suspect that if Hillary Clinton were the Democratic nominee in 2008, she would have won the top office. How long do you think it will take for us to have an Indigenous president of any gender? A person born in the US also won't become president if they're Jewish or Muslim, even if they're white, male, and heterosexual.

The limitations on what we can do are not discussed as much as the apparent freedoms we have to become whatever we want. I want to live in a world where children and women are not routinely and customarily sexually assaulted. I want a world where no Indigenous people are facing genocidal destruction. I want a world without military wars, without warlords, and without patriarchal tyrants and terrorists. But I suppose that's asking for too much.

So back to the small world of our own private emotional worlds that I'm supposed to be preoccupied with if I'm allowed to think about such things at all.

Online, I found what follows, from *here*. The author discusses the same program on OWN that I watched. For those who don't know, Sarah "Fergie" Ferguson was married to Prince Andrew of the British Royal Family, but lost the marriage and a lot more. But she's not homeless because Prince Andrew is paying her rent. That's what knowing and being loved and cared about by rich people can do for you. But if the rich are the few--increasingly the tinier few--this means, necessarily, that there will be fewer non-rich people who know them that well.

As I'm not generally cynical, I find some of the concepts here quite moving.
Hi beautiful and powerful women;
While watching the new reality show, "Finding Sarah", I had a breakthrough moment or an "aha" moment as Oprah calls it. Fergie was talking with Dr. Phil and he was explaining why some of us are "blocked" at certain phases of our lives - We all have a personal truth, and that truth is what we really believe about ourselves when nobody is looking or listening. It's what we truly believe about ourselves in the core of our souls. He said, "Personal truth is so important because I think we generate the results in our life that we believe we deserve." I had to rewind that statement several times to totally absorb those powerful words. "Wow", what do I believe I deserve? Have I been blocking myself from all the universe has to share with me by believing I'm undeserving? Dr. Phil went on to say, "If you have a damaged personal truth, you generate the results that match that." "When we grow up, people write on the slate of who we are. People like parents write on our slate. But the most tragic thing of all is when we pick up the pen and start writing and we write the same things they did.." What is your personal truth? What is my personal truth? Do we have a damaged personal truth? That's a powerful question that deserves some honest quiet time to reflect. If your personal truth was damaged like mine was as a child, it's time for us to take that story and write in the the beautiful truth about who we are and what we deserve. We are amazing children and women of God, and while our parents were doing their best to gift us what they could, they probably didn't have the tools to sculpt the masterpiece we are meant to be. Now it's our responsibility to accept God's grace, love, and power so we may soar like angels... The more we have, the more we have to share with one another. We are all beautiful and so deserving of all the miracles, love, abundance, and magic this world and the universe has to share with us. Know how precious and beautiful you are and I ,too, will try to see God's beauty in me. I love all of you and I believe your personal truth is amazing!
You will note that there's no mention of how society, as a whole, or media in particular, writes on our slates. And how even if we have caring families with loving care-givers, a hostile world all jagged and nasty with rape and racism will still find ways to write on our slates.

I had loving care-givers. Several of them. I never went to bed not having eaten all day, and I always had a bed to sleep in. We might say I was lucky, but a whole lot of that not going to bed hungry and having a bed has to do with the particulars of my family's history of being white and therefore able to get employed in certain ways that weren't available to people of color.

I also was bullied for years, sexually abused and sexually assaulted, and endured anti-Semitism and a whole fucking lot of homophobic violence.

The sexual assault, perhaps even more than the bullying, wrote on my slate. What the assaulter wrote on me was this:

You are worthless. You are nothing. You are a thing for me to use as I see fit. You are something for me to wipe myself on. You are dirty. You are bad. You are aren't human in the way that I am human--I get to do stuff to you and you don't get to do stuff to me. Your value is in being used.

As  many feminists have noted, this is power boiled down to its essence: the ability to act. The ability to have what one wants done to be done. Crystal Harris just broke off her engagement to Hugh Hefner. He's 85 and she's sixty years younger than him. She decided she didn't want to be a well-kept prisoner. I'm glad. Apparently Hugh is quite a tyrant at home. He demands that things go his way all the damn time. He has movie nights and the women he wants there have to be there--two old movies on two nights; a new movie on the third night. He wants to play cards at certain times, so that's what the women around him do because they know if they don't they'll be tossed out on their exploitively photographed butts. Hugh Hefner is a silk-pajama'ed pimp who figured out how to be a publisher. That's what he ought to be well-known for. But corporate media will tout him as a fighter for justice and freedom; "only his own freedom" is the part that's left out.

I wanted to prostitute myself to procurers on and off during parts of my life and probably the one thing that kept me from doing it was not being homeless and broke. And when I seriously contemplated doing so, I'd come into contact, very strongly, with those messages that the serial rapist of children wrote on my slate. And knowing that selling myself to strange men would deepen the grooves of those etched messages left me very conflicted about following through with what be might be called a compulsion that wasn't acted out for many years.

I acted it out with a male cousin for a few years in motel rooms, answering his calls for sex as he wanted it. That did more deeply etch some of those messages--particularly the ones that told me I was undesirable except to be used. I'm now thinking about how when a man is interested in me that fact alone is triggering. Now I know why: it triggers what, in my memory, is the stuff that happens next: being used and abused.

I am celibate and I am asexual and it is with those conditions in place that I pursue my own form of happiness that doesn't look much like what corporate media tells me I should be acquiring to get it.

I know many people, mostly not white, mostly not men, who also choose to not have sex with other people. Some of them have active and enjoyable sexual relationships with themselves: I call that being celibate. I don't welcome or want sex: I call that being asexual.

I'm not anti-sex any more than I'm anti-food. I think sex can be as good as eating, as nutritious and fulfilling, and as bad compulsively eating CRAPpy food or getting food poisoning. And when you need food, you eat what's available. And when people want sex or romance with others, sometimes they take what they can get.

I watched female cousins choose men who were neglectful and abusive, get divorced, and then meet men who were far more loving. I suspect that they learned something about their value by being so devalued in their first marriages and, importantly, understanding that the messenger was wrong. In reflecting on their first husbands, I am struck with how these young men were very much like many other men around at that time, living in that culture. Curiously, the second husbands were from other states and other cultures. When they had a real opportunity to eat better food, they did. One of my cousins now runs regularly and eats mostly organic food. We didn't know what organic food was when we were kids. We were too busy eating peanut butter with added sugar and hydrogenated oil; with marshmallow fluff, which was basically all sugar; on very white bread made from bleached, bromated flour. The culture wasn't yet selling whole grain bread in the grocery stores. We take what is available, often enough. And that isn't the same as having freedom of choice.

I saw a man on television who was being interviewed by news media. He and his children had no clean water to drink, and no home, and were drinking water gathered from a stream where people washed their clothes and bodies. Thirsty in the heat, he was pouring it into his mouth and, one presumes, into the mouths of his children. He was being as good a care-giver as he could be within the conditions he was living inside. How he was far more like how most people live than how the members of the The Brady Bunch, or even the Depression-era Waltons lived. I remember reading an article in the New York Times about how the Waltons on television we're being depicted at all like how poor whites in that part of the US were actually living during that time in history. The punishing poverty common to that area of the US was removed from their story.

I wanted to believe it was close enough, because believing the television shows were dishonest was too difficult to accept. I needed it too much--to be the Truth. If television lied, that meant I had nothing into which to find my lonely hopes fulfilled.


Monday, February 7, 2011

Calgary Peace Prize Going to Dr. Vandana Shiva, March 10, 2011 ECD

photograph of Dr. Vandana Shiva is from here

What follows is from Slow Food Calgary. You may link back by clicking on the title below.

Dr. Vandana Shiva to receive the Calgary Peace Prize


Filed February 6th, 2011, in Community, Events, Global.

On March 10th, the University of Calgary’s Consortium for Peace Studies will award Dr. Vandana Shiva, a world-renowned environmental activist from New Dehli, The Calgary Peace Prize.

The awards ceremony and banquet will be held at the Calgary Golf & Country Club.
Tickets are available via the U of C’s secure Net Community: TICKETS

About Vandana Shiva:

Time Magazine identified Dr. Shiva as an environmental “hero” in 2003 and Asia Week has called her one of the five most powerful communicators in Asia. Dr. Shiva has pioneered the organic movement in India and established Navdanya, the country’s biggest network of seed keepers and organic producers. Dr. Shiva has authored many books including Soil Not Oil, Earth Democracy, Stolen Harvest, Staying Alive, Water Wars and Biopiracy. Her work has earned these distinctions: The Alternative Nobel Prize (Right Livelihood Award, 1993), Order of the Golden Ark, Global 500 Award of UN and Earth Day International Award, Lennon ONO grant for peace award by Yoko Ono, Yo Dona Award by Yo Dona Magazine, Spain and Sydney Peace Prize 2010.

On March 10th in Calgary, Dr Shiva will be receive the University of Calgary’s Consortium for Peace Studies’ $5,000 prize and will speak about her commitment to social justice, the empowerment of women in developing countries, human rights for small farming communities, and about her scientific analysis of environmental sustainability.

About the Calgary Peace Prize:

The Calgary Peace Prize was established by the Consortium for Peace Studies at the University of Calgary in 2006. The prize recognizes outstanding individuals from the global community, whose work has made the world a safer and less violent place. The Consortium for Peace Studies has established this prize to recognize outstanding contributions in peace work, and to highlight Calgary’s commitment to furthering global peace. Past recipients include: Mayor Tadatoshi Akiba of Hiroshima, Japan, His Royal Highness Prince El Hassan Bin Talal of Jordan, former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Madam Louise Arbour and journalist Sally Armstrong.

Tuesday, December 7, 2010

"Welfare is a Women's Issue" (Ms., 1972), by a U.S. Feminist Shero and Welfare Warrior, Johnnie Tillmon (1926 - 1995)

image of book on women and welfare, with Johnnie Tillmon front and center, is from here
Johnnie Tillmon is mentioned throughout the book above. As well she should be.
She is one of several defining voices addressing the welfare state
as part of the racist patriarchal state called the U.S. 
More on the book may be found
*at Amazon.com* and *on Google Books*.

The full image that was made into the cover of Welfare Warriors:
photograph of Johnnie Tillmon is from here

Behold herstory.

What follows is a brilliant piece of writing. Below it is biographical information the author, feminist activist Johnnie Tillmon. It is with full permission from Ms. (thank you, Jessica!) that I reprint the article here on A.R.P.

It is originally from Ms. magazine's very first issue in 1972!
It re-appeared in Ms. thirty years later. Please click on the title to link back to the source website of this writing, at msmagazine.com.

FEATURE | spring 2002

Spring 2002 Table of Contents 



Welfare is a Women's Issue (1972)

by Johnnie Tillmon



I'm a woman. I'm a black woman. I'm a poor woman. I'm a fat woman. I'm a middle-aged woman. And I'm on welfare.

In this country, if you're any one of those things you count less as a human being. If you're all those things, you don't count at all. Except as a statistic.

I am 45 years old. I have raised six children. There are millions of statistics like me. Some on welfare. Some not. And some, really poor, who don't even know they're entitled to welfare. Not all of them are black. Not at all. In fact, the majority-about two-thirds-of all the poor families in the country are white.

Welfare's like a traffic accident. It can happen to anybody, but especially it happens to women.

And that's why welfare is a women's issue. For a lot of middle-class women in this country, Women's Liberation is a matter of concern. For women on welfare it's a matter of survival.

Survival. That's why we had to go on welfare. And that's why we can't get off welfare now. Not us women. Not until we do something about liberating poor women in this country.

Because up until now we've been raised to expect to work, all our lives, for nothing. Because we are the worst educated, the least-skilled, and the lowest-paid people there are. Because we have to be almost totally responsible for our children. Because we are regarded by everybody as dependents. That's why we are on welfare. And that's why we stay on it.

Welfare is the most prejudiced institution in this country, even more than marriage, which it tries to imitate. Let me explain that a little.

Ninety-nine percent of welfare families are headed by women. There is no man around. In half the states there can't be men around because A.F.D.C. (Aid to Families With Dependent Children) says if there is an "able-bodied" man around, then you can't be on welfare. If the kids are going to eat, and the man can't get a job, then he's got to go.

Welfare is like a super-sexist marriage. You trade in a man for the man. But you can't divorce him if he treats you bad. He can divorce you, of course, cut you off anytime he wants. But in that case, he keeps the kids, not you.The man runs everything. In ordinary marriage, sex is supposed to be for your husband. On A.F.D.C., you're not supposed to have any sex at all. You give up control of your own body. It's a condition of aid. You may even have to agree to get your tubes tied so you can never have more children just to avoid being cut off welfare.

The man, the welfare system, controls your money. He tells you what to buy, what not to buy, where to buy it, and how much things cost. If things-rent, for instance-really cost more than he says they do, it's just too bad for you. He's always right.

That's why Governor [Ronald] Reagan can get away with slandering welfare recipients, calling them "lazy parasites," "pigs at the trough," and such. We've been trained to believe that the only reason people are on welfare is because there's something wrong with their character. If people have "motivation," if people only want to work, they can, and they will be able to support themselves and their kids in decency.

The truth is a job doesn't necessarily mean an adequate income. There are some ten million jobs that now pay less than the minimum wage, and if you're a woman, you've got the best chance of getting one. Why would a 45-year-old woman work all day in a laundry ironing shirts at 90-some cents an hour? Because she knows there's some place lower she could be. She could be on welfare. Society needs women on welfare as "examples" to let every woman, factory workers and housewife workers alike, know what will happen if she lets up, if she's laid off, if she tries to go it alone without a man. So these ladies stay on their feet or on their knees all their lives instead of asking why they're only getting 90-some cents an hour, instead of daring to fight and complain.

Maybe we poor welfare women will really liberate women in this country. We've already started on our own welfare plan. Along with other welfare recipients, we have organized so we can have some voice. Our group is called the National Welfare Rights Organization (N.W.R.O.). We put together our own welfare plan, called Guaranteed Adequate Income (G.A.I.), which would eliminate sexism from welfare. There would be no "categories"-men, women, children, single, married, kids, no kids-just poor people who need aid. You'd get paid according to need and family size only and that would be upped as the cost of living goes up.

As far as I'm concerned, the ladies of N.W.R.O. are the front-line troops of women's freedom. Both because we have so few illusions and because our issues are so important to all women-the right to a living wage for women's work, the right to life itself.


*          *          *
What follows next is from *here* at blackpast.org.

Tillmon, Johnnie (1926-1995)


 Johnnie Tillmon was born in Scott, Arkansas, in 1926. A migrant sharecropper’s daughter, she moved to California in 1959 to join her brothers and worked as a union shop steward in a Compton laundry. Tillmon organized workers and became involved in a community association called the Nickerson Garden Planning Organization which was established to improve living conditions in the housing project.

Tillmon became ill in 1963, and was advised to seek welfare. She was hesitant at first, but decided to apply for assistance to take care of her children. She immediately learned how welfare recipients were harassed by caseworkers who went to their apartments looking for evidence of extra support and who designated how they should spend money. In order to fight against this dehumanized treatment, Tillmon organized people on welfare in the housing project and founded one of the first grassroots welfare mothers’ organizations called ANC (Aid to Needy Children) Mothers Anonymous, in 1963. When a former CORE activist, George Wiley, brought together local welfare recipients’ groups and transformed them into a national movement, ANC Mothers joined the movement and became a part of the National Welfare Rights Organization (NWRO). Tillmon quickly emerged as a leader and became a chairperson of the NWRO. Together with other welfare mothers, she struggled for adequate income, dignity, justice, and democratic participation.

While the NWRO was officially run by welfare recipients, the male middle-class staff managed the finances and administered the national office, wielding great influence over the organization. Tillmon and other welfare mothers became increasingly critical of Wiley and his supporters who dominated leadership positions, and sought to place control of the organization in the hands of the welfare recipients. When the number of recipients rapidly increased and the NWRO was under fierce attack, the internal conflict between the staff members and welfare recipients came to the forefront. While Wiley and his advisors tried to mobilize the working poor, especially the white blue-collar workers, into the welfare rights movement, welfare mothers led by Tillmon sought to align with a women’s movement and gain support from feminist organizations such as the National Organization for Women (NOW).

In 1972, Tillmon published an article in Ms magazine entitled “Welfare Is a Women’s Issue,” articulating how the welfare system controlled the lives of women on welfare and constantly placed them under the scrutiny of government authorities. She tried to broaden the horizon of the feminist movement by redefining poverty as a “women’s issue.” When Wiley resigned in late 1972, Tillmon was chosen as the new Executive Director of the NWRO. The funding for the organization, however, had become depleted by the time she became the director. After the NWRO folded in 1975, Tillmon returned to Los Angeles, continuing her struggle for welfare rights at the local and state levels. In 1995 Tillmon passed away at the age of 69. 

Sources:
Johnnie Tillmon, “Welfare is a Women’s Issue,” Ms Magazine (Spring, 1972): 111-16; Guida West, The National Welfare Rights Movement: The Social Protest of Poor Women (New York: Praeger, 1981); Premilla Nadasen, Welfare Warriors: The Welfare Rights Movement in the United States (New York: Routledge, 2005).
 
Contributor(s):
Tsuchiya, Kazuyo
University of California, San Diego
 
*          *          *

For more on Johnnie Tillmon and her activist work, please also visit these linked-to websites:

Saturday, September 25, 2010

The Poisonous Politics of Food Production and Consumption and What We Can Do

The article below flows from the brilliant work of people like Vandana Shiva. Here is one of her speeches on this subject:


The source website for what follows may be linked back to here: 

5 Terrible Problems With the Way We Eat (And What You Can Do About Them)

Most of the problems in our food system stem from the concentration of power, land, wealth, and political influence in the hands of a few large players.

Aquaculture may be an important food source in the future (see above) but much of it is practiced in ways that are unhealthy for eaters, native species and the environment. If GMO salmon is approved, (still pending at press time) it will only add to the list of everything that is wrong with farming carnivorous fish in the open ocean. Don’t replace that salmon on your plate with shrimp. Ever wonder why the shrimp is so cheap at restaurants like Red Lobster?

What can you do about it?

Educate yourself on sustainable aquaculture. In general, only eat farmed fish that are natural vegetarians and only buy from suppliers that are transparent about the origins of their fish.

4. Genetically Modified Crops

Besides being untested for their effects on human health, genetically modified seeds don’t necessarily produce greater yields, and can lead to over-application of pesticides that in turn can cause super weeds which have the potential to threaten overall biodiversity, and to contaminate non-gmo crops with their genetic material. The most recent case involving GMOS ended badly when the USDA issued permits allowing GMO sugar beets to be planted in defiance of a federal judge. The judge had issued a decision to stop the planting of GMO sugar beets on the grounds that they may cross-pollinate table beets and Swiss chard. Despite the fact that most other countries have laws outlawing or requiring the labeling of GMO foods, our government continues to bow down to industry.

What can you do about it?

Educate yourself about which crops are commonly genetically modified and only buy organic versions. Better yet, support the companies involved in the non-GMO project. These are the companies willing to go out on a limb and actually test their organic ingredients to make sure they are not contaminated. Also, raise your voice and let the USDA and our legislators know that you don’t want GMOS!

5. Exploitation of Workers

From actual documented slavery in Florida’s tomato fields, to daily pesticide exposure in farming communities, to the fact that America’s lowest paying jobs are in fast food restaurants – our food system crushes workers, ruins their health, and keeps them in poverty so that they need the cheap, processed, industrialized food to survive.

What can you do about it?

This is a tough one, because buying from local, organic farms isn’t necessarily the answer. Even the nicest local, organic farms don’t pay their workers much and require long hours of backbreaking work. The farmers often work just as hard and can’t even afford health insurance for themselves or their families, so even if they want to do better by their workers, they can’t. This is where raising your voice for a more fair government policy that benefits small farmers equally can help. The new USDA is doing a better job clamping down on the big guys and supporting small-scale farmers than ever before, but we’ve got a ways to go.