Abortion rights movement (was Nixon's the One)

Diane Monaco dmonaco at pop3.utoledo.edu
Thu May 16 10:34:45 PDT 2002


At 08:41 PM 5/15/2002 -0400, you wrote:
>In a message dated 05/15/2002 3:12:58 PM Central Daylight Time,
>dhenwood at panix.com writes:
>
> > Let's take an example I've brought up before - the abortion rights
> > movement. It's become so legalistic, so Washington-centered, and so
> > focused on electing Dems that it's done next to nothing to build up
> > membership organizations - people that can be mobilized in large
> > numbers to phone, email, knock on doors.

Jacob wrote:
>The abortion rights movement is clearly aware of the need to build a
>membership organization, thus their extensive use of direct mail, and their
>web presence. Direct mail was pretty successful for the right in the late
>70s and early 80s (remember Richard Viguerie [sp?])? What else should NARAL
>and like organizations be doing?

Jacob, these are great questions and I'm glad you brought them up. I also receive the direct mailings from NARAL and other groups that you mention. I put their stickers all around my office for the benefit of those who enter. Students take quick glances and are hopefully reminded of these issues -- perhaps they are even encouraged to take a active stand -- it's easy to do on our campus. I even give stickers and the information received to my daughter and her friends who have lively discussions with fundamentalists at the school lunch table. But still aren't these mailings sent to us a little like "sending coal to Newcastle" as my English maternal grandparents would say.

What about the poor and young women (and men) who don't get on these mailing lists ...who are not on college campuses...who don't vote...who for the most part are not even registered to vote? How can NARAL and other groups reach those people?

I think Doug is right here. The abortion rights groups (and I would add most feminist organizations today) have failed to increase their effectiveness (membership), not because their messages do not represent our sentiments (70% of the country support a woman's right to abortion), but because these groups have all but abandoned their activism at the grassroots level. The focus (funds) these days is on getting legislation passed in an electoral system that does not represent the population. How effective has this been? Well, just yesterday the white male average age over 60 dominated Appropriations Committee voted to give Bush "broad discretion" to withhold the very money that Congress had already approved for the UN Population Fund.

An electoral system that only represents a small segment of the population will change next to nothing for the rest. It's futile. Change happens from the bottom up such as getting the underrepresented groups registered to vote and then voting for the candidates who will best represent their needs. I think the abortion rights groups can also help do this.

Diane



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list