[SOCIALIST ACTION JUNE 1985 Carroll: A demoralization occurred…]

Scan page 7

SOCIALIST ACTION JUNE 1985 Carroll: A demoralization occurred when Reagan was re-elected in November, I think, and also at the very weak showing that Mr. Mondale provided in terms of the freeze.

In Mr. Mondale's second debate, you'll recall, he tried to out-Reagan Reagan and talked about how he would be willing to intervene in Nicaragua if he had to. He backed off on the freeze, talking about his willingness to go forward with certain first-strike programs.

The April actions were a step in the direction of getting people reactivated. This was particularly true in the attempt to build a coalition of people who support the Freeze-which has more of a middle-class constituency among its hard-core advocates-and other groups that link the freeze to the issues of "The April actions were a step in the direction of getting people reactivated apartheid, U.S. domestic policies.

S.A.: In addition to the petition campaign you spoke about, what other methods of protest should the antinuclear-weapons movement pursue?

Carroll: I believe that we should continue to try to encourage political expression in its various forms. I think sometimes people in the movement underestimate the importance of lobbying. After all, members of Congress are the ones who vote yes or no on these appropriations.

If we had a really serious and intensified pressure campaign on the members of Congress, I think that would be a very important step. Remember that mament march of millio Tschirhart (continued from page 6: “Hiroshima No More Nagasaki Zendents Union”) now they're looking for the panacea. They wish it were that simple.

S.A.: What is your assessment of the April 20 demonstrations, particularly of the one here in San Francisco?

Tschirhart: I was one of the co-chairs of the San Francisco April mobilization and was on the finance committee. From the financial perspective, it was the first time in a coalition that there was so much financial accessibility. Every event brought in money.

This was very new. The union people provided some strong leadership and took the financial needs of the event very seriously.

The style of meeting was quite structured compared to many of the previous coalitions. There was an attempt to make decisions by consensus but there was clarity about where decisions were made. We tried to avoid unnecessary debate and struggle. By the time we formed the coalition, we had only three months to create the march and rally.

Basically what happened was that groups agreed to themes, and then other individuals and groups came on the scene and wanted to interject other themes. This happened after more than 200 individuals and groups had endorsed.

S.A.: So you feel it was important that there was a commitment to the initial four themes?

Tschirhart: I feel that if we are going to be broad-based, we have to find out what issues we can agree on and build in New 12, 1982 the coalition around those. This time most of the unions were saying, "I represent a constituency and our participation in this coalition is dependent on a commitment to the themes that we started out with at the beginning."

This is true of the Freeze, too. When we first began three years ago, we couldn't combine the nuclear freeze with non-intervention in Central America. But over the past two years Freeze supporters have been educated on Central America. Now we're nearly unanimous on this issue.

It is important that we find out where people and groups are in agreement and move from there. Other issues should be handled by other structures and other coalitions if they limit the ability to bring out people and organize massively. It is important if organizations with constituencies are involved that you don't change the focus of the event without allowing adequate time for the representatives to renegotiate with their constituents.

A lot more education is necessary. You're not going to force people sitting around the table, who represent others and have voted on something, to accept another theme until that education and agreement happens.

S.A.: The turnout was impressive50,000, some say a little more...

Ischirhart: I think it came at an important point. I think people needed the feeling that they are not alone. At least for our Freeze people, we worked so hard on the election and we feel somewhat voiceless now with Reagan in the White House. I think people felt their voice, their strength, that even on a rainy day we can be 50,000 strong. That was quite an accomplishment.

People were by and large excited about the program and the march. I heard from almost everyone that it was a moment of hope.

S.A.: So where does the coalition go from here? Can the coalition stay together around the four themes— freeze and reverse nuclear weapons, end U.S. support to apartheid, end U.S. intervention in Central America, and jobs and justice?

Tschirhart: As you asked me the question, 1 realized how sophisticated it is to see the connections among the four themes. You can't expect that sophistication from everyone.

People come to the Freeze and they work for us for a few years and all of a sudden when they look at things more deeply they see the connection among the four themes of April 20. We all joined in one march and we did connect those themes. It is a beginning.

I would hope that next time we could agree on four major speakers and really show these connections-that money and energy should be spent on jobs, justice, and people-not destruction, but life.

I think there are possibilities for the future. The Freeze is committed locally and nationally to coalition building. We feel it would be good if there were an ongoing coalition with these four themes. We are interested in the most broad-based coalition we can build which calls for jobs, peace, and justice.

Scan page 8

ful than the bomb that leveled Hiro-