we will do a photo line if you want another book you can ask the staff. thank you for joining us. we hope to see you again. [inaudible] [inaudible conversation] [inaudible another author discussion coming up. this one is around the topic of civic engagement. one of the authors you will hear from is nadine strasser, head of the aclu for about 20 years. live coverage of the la times

book there on the tv. >> good afternoon. welcome to the la times festival of books. this is the speaking out in the fighng back panels if you came to talk about empowerment and action you came to the right place. little housekeeping stuff. this is being aired live on the tv so we will be hearing time schedule to the second. we are doing a question toward supply in up to mid answer it's because were done because of the tv schedule. your cell phones are on, please check and make sure they are turned off or set on silent or vibrate. because this is a book tv there's no personal recording of allowed. the book signing "after words" will be signing area one which is somewhere up there with better description as you go. a lot of times folks want to talk to the panelists

immediately "after words". please meet us at the book signing area because we have to clear this room out. the panel will be putting a formal and ask a few questions of folks and then open questions from the floor. we find this historically it works this way and we could talk for two hours and have a grand old time and bore the hell out of you guys. it's more fun if you ask questions. when it comes time to ask questions because this is on live tv we will have microphones handed to you. i will have you raise your hand and wait for the microphone to get to you and then have a question. ask questions, don't make

speeches. [inaudible] i've been an editorial writer for the past three years and prior to that i was a reporter for decades covering everything from killings to customer to presidential primaries and blood i write history books and my most recent andhe assassin about religious zealot castrated himself and shot john oxbow. it's in that capacity and moderating that capacity today. we have ashley farmer of oxford university. her book is remaking black power held documented and an era. it's a subject my light reading and subbed has been vastly overlooked and doesn't get the attention it deserves. [inaudible] ale writes tt

those helped lay the ground black party and your book ends in the 70s -- >> yes, 79, 80. >> we can talk about that later [iudible] teaches at the new york law school. earlier in her career she spent 15 years as president of the american liberties foundation, the aclu. [inaudible] i do a lot of

reading of the good stuff and this is a really good hand guide to what we have and how to get to this position. you also might find it's provocative and the short version is no matter how onerous someone's views are they must not be muscled because once you allow that then it lies in the hands of have the power we can talk about that in the depth is gone. in the middle susan [inaudible] it's a powerful memoir of life growing up in los angeles. south la, it was a very little life with sexual abuse and drug

addiction and stints in jail and prison and that is just the first half of the book. it's a powerful and painful. the second half of the book is about her realization that much of what she was doing and what happened to her as a function of racist andysfunconal system that affects people of color. she got clean and began the new life nonprofit. it's a remarkable story and very well written and takes a clear look at thensid of broken lives in of personal redemption and the power that one person can achieve by speaking out and fighting back. despite were here today. susan, please tell us what finally enabled you to get a hold of yourself and turn your life around and what have you

break that cycle? >> i always wanted to be my best self but having the support and the resources that bind that so i landed in recovery home in santa monica. upper-class community, full of resources and is able to access ourc and leave their stronger. >> is a remarkable anecdote in the book about jail in beverly hills when how the system is structured against you. >> yes, yes, in court there was a person in the cell with me and she talks about going to a place called council of rehabilitation center and i had always talked about how it would give you a

civil commitment and get help and so i went and advocated for myself in the courtroom that day. i was able to get the program myself but that was after four prison terms. >> [inaudible] >> no, i was never ever. one day when he walked in the courtroom -- well, there was a picture of my mom in the newspaper and my mom was putting on the light where my son had gotten killed by an lapd detective and i took that paper into the courtroom and i see this and i still got sent to prison. >> the killing of her son wasn't la city police driving a car -- >> lapd detective and it was an

accident but it wasn't an accident that he never got out of the car. it wasn't an accident that lapd never said i'm sorry you lost your son, how can we help? you know, so, that sent me smiling into alcoholism and addiction and try to medicate the pain. that is what sent me to prison. that went on for 20 years and i stayed under the authority of the california department of corrections. in and out, in and out. >> and no facility to help you break that cycle? >> and luckily i sat down with someone who told me about the place in santa monica and in those times in those days you dialed for 11 and i dialed 411 and got the number and called and i was so fortunate to land there and spend time there in the community where people were

not incarcerated for possession but given support and community service and aa and defer to treatment and support. and unlike why did i get that? >> i can't stress how compelling that switches from the first half to the second half. will come back to that but -- i lost track of my notes. [inaudible] can you explore how susan experienced the ultimate history and the much larger perseverance in organizing for community activism. >> it's interesting for the way an individual can prevail and incarceration but also in ways in which you transform it and i see the woman that i write about

in the black power's movement that they have contact with that in most of the time that you see these women become politicized it's around issues of police violence which we been dealing with since theinni of time. you see them politiciz around the black panther party and you see them politicized around not having work and being poor and impoverished and you see how one person's actions during the group and from that they organize mass incarceration, drug abuse et cetera but you also see how the state fight back with the rise of the counter intelligence program to stamp these things out. one of the things is a connection between my book about black women in the 1960s and 70s and black power and what susan talks about is you see how

a movement based around black self-determination and black community control at the indivialr the everyday level of being a woman in america or part of a group really did spark transformative ideas of how we should police black communities and how we should respond to police violence and organize to not have to rely on the state. so, i really do see it as -- you know, your work you're doing they missed the legacy of that. this idea that we are still battling the same issues that they transform but i imagine the things you do in your nonprofit are the same kind of community building and consciousness raising activities that you see the women in the black panther party or, you know, other groups in new york and la. >> let's go deeper in history and the role ofhe domestic workers were doing a century ago. how did they come together and

what impact did they have? >> the book begins talking about african-american women in new york were drastic workers. identified your only job could be a domestic worker. in the 60s maybe with a little education you might become a schoolteacher but by and large the majority of black women in the north, west and south are domestic workers. it compelled by this communal experience of being at the bottom in dealing with racist violence in dealing with sexual expectation usually in the homes of these white communities and dealing with the fact that you can't make a living wage it organized and politicized around this idea. they become in the intersect which the political climate particularly the commonest party which is sympathetic to their working-class flight. i try to show you in the book is how these black women workers

were an analysis of race and sexism and expectation and it comes together to create a formative political block but they went on to organizations into mentor those of the 60s and 70s and teach them how to organize at the intersection of this racism into capitalism and anti- sexist oppression. >> your book doesn't intersect closely with the other two but there is a commonality with the speaking out part. happy to support the latest free-speech we agree with but we want to grant the same freedom to those who we disagree with. but what about those who preach hate? [inaudible] can you talk a little about the hate speech and organizations as the and a cp and how white supremacist may be able to speak --

>> scott, with all due respect there's an enormous and overlap between my book and one of the books by susan and ashley. the concept of hate is inherently subjective by definition. if we invest government officials including police and law enforcement with all of the endemic racism that we see in the so-called criminal justice system. we should not be surprised if the discretionary power to decide that some words are hated and hateful and harmful and dangerous that power is not going to be used in a way that is finally to activist such as the one that ashley writes about in that susan embodies herself. in fact, today black lives matter has been attacked as a so-called hate group and its

advocacy has been attacked as a hate speech. state legislators have been lobbied in the southern poverty law center have been lobbied to treat it as a hatemongering group. so, if we want freedom of speech especially for minority voices and dissenting opinions and those who challenge the status quo we need to have a sufficiently robust freedom of speech that extends to speech that is deemed hateful by the majority and certainly the black panther activts were repeatedly in martin luther king and civil rights demonstrated said that for the same reason. >> you write in the book where there is illegal speech and

could you distinctly talk about -- >> i'll try to be distinct but i have great respect for free-speech jurisprudence as a result of writing this book. basically the law is commonsensical and you may not punish speech nearly because the legal system and the communities law enforcement and government officials didn't like the message. that can never be a justification for suppression of speech but you may punish it if it directly causes pacific eminent harm such as the genuine threat or inttional incitement of violence or targeted harassment. when the speech actually does cause harm it can be and is punished. when it is just that we dislike the idea, it is protected and we have to raise our voices. getting back to the theme of the

panel to denounce that hateful idea and support the people who are disparaged by idea. that counter speech has been very powerful as we saw, for example, in the wake of charlottesville. >> let me give you a scenario. if someone was giving a speech and says someone ought to go hang that person versus someone says you, go hang a person. >> the second one would be a threat in the first one would probably be protected political speech about public issues and it has to do with an objection about what that person is done and in fact many of the civil rights demonstrators and activists against police violence have been subject to censorship because their abuse of making threats when their denouncing someone who's engaging in illegal arrest. there's a famous up in court case where the young african-american man during the

vietnam that era had been drafted and they feared he would be drafted because he got a low number in the lottery that they were conducting then and said if they ever draft me and put a gun in my arms they will not make me shoot my black brothers in vietnam. the fit person i want to get in my site is lbj standing for lyndon b. johnson johnson, the present. the supreme court said no, that hyperbolic political speech, johnson would not have been in reasonable fear that he would've been shot and this is a very strong powerful way to express of frustration with the legal system. >> and a political message. fascinating stuff to me. susan, how hard does it affect you as a woman of color with drug abuse and how hard was it

for you to get your voice heard? i went to hearings in sacramento and it felt like we were talking to the wall. >> yes, when i did get stronger and began to understand the law and how those laws were impacting my entire community i began to go to sacramento and began to talk to legislators and speak out and i'd sit there and watch them passing laws regardless to myestimony laws that i knew would be harmful especially laws around young people. it seems like i was talking to deaf ears. for a period of time i would leave sacramento in the next day my entire body would be in knots and i could hardly move.

i elected to stop going there for that. but now they hear me. now i'm asked by legislators to come up with different policies and come and testify on different bills that are in sacramento and other places from sacramento to dc. so, what i say is keep talking. they will stop. i didn't stop talking but i did stop going for a period of time. i was getting physically ill from watching all of the harm that was taking place there law. >> so, when you stopped going to sacramento what was the status of your foundation?

you were just in that first house or have you already gone out? >> i've had to build the second house. [inaudible]ng that because >> i have five homes now. my next step is to create a national network of safehouses for women to be transition out of prison and jails back to their community and be able to have the opportunity to rebuild their lives. >> and how many people work for you? >> i have a staff of 25. >> and how many are lawyers? >> six. >> do you think that helps you get hurt? [laughter] >> the law can be powerful and a powerful tool. i was just reciting laws to the sheriff's department.

there are thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands of people there who need to be registered to vote and we go in and register them to vote. my number one trooper there's a glitch in her clearance so i had to remind him of the code that allow her to be clear through the law department. law does help. >> this might be simplistic or obvious but we have the right to free speech but we have the right not to listen. can you talk about the friction we been seen in recent years in college campuses at the moment? >> the supreme court turned the term hecklers in the -- so much of it was formulated because these were tactics including

shouting down and threatening speakers and demonstrators by hostile audiences. these were tactics used to try to silence civil right speech and civil right demonstration d the supreme court said hecklers may not, in effect, veto the speech that people want to convey and that certain audience members want to hear rather government has to punish those who are heckling. so, you use law enforcement to prevent violence and you do not censor the speer to prevent violence. >> briefly in your book could you expand on this? there was a situation in missouri years ago when the clan and the white nationalists did their demonstrations and looking to agitate a reaction and you

see if conservatives go campuses to jar a reaction. but one person had a stopwatch and took pledges from folks who are sympathetic or anti- the clan and were going to a fundraiser so they collected a dollar for every minute it went on and the longer they talk the more they raise money but they e was young buck people and that's what the donation 14. >> i could give a number of examples and there's a chapter on ways that are not consistent with freedom of speech in the quality that are more effective hateful ideas action. the southern poverty law center was monitoring is something i admire put out a guide last summer for college campuses because unfortunately the old right is recruiting on college campuses and the splc

says do not give them the oxygen that they are seeking and don't play into their strategy of gaining attention and sympathy that they otherwise would not have had violent counter protests or through trying to shut them down. when i was writing my book couple of years ago nobody had heard of my loading uplifts. it wasn't until berkeley denied him a platform that he became a household name and it was the same strategy used by the nazis in germany. they loved the fact that they were prosecuted for engaging in hate speech which was a crime in germany at the time. the child became a platform for them, a propaganda device for which they got sympathy. don't play into that strategy and ignore them or mark them or rebut them. >> the white cloud there were

clowns or something? >> again, some young men and i hate to generalize but that seems to be a particular target audience for hateful recruiters and they loved the idea of battling and it makes him feel the relic but if you treat them like clowns and throw white powder over there white advocacy somehow it's not as -- >> it defames them a bit. going to ask ashley and open it up for questions from the floor. if you have a question just hand and i will pick you and bring the microphone to you. ashley, you write about robert williams and i interviewed him a couple of decades ago living in western michigan and you wrote about his life in the role she played to stand up to the clan

in south carolina. >> north carolina. >> in my right that i should look at them as a power couple [inaudible] >> robert is a community activist, a guy that grew up in thearly 20th century and went off to war and you come back and once you've seen the way that people treat you like and you don't have to take it and you come back to north carolina and organizes it. it's a really good talk about the limitations of free speech and exercise of rights so he joins the naacp and at the same time gets a chapter of the nra and under the second amendment aren't the members of the munro chapter of the naacp. he goes on camera saying i'm tired of people shooting at my

house for protesting segregation and tired of my house being and in my community being a friend. we will arm ourselves not to shoot them but under our second amendment right to defend our communities. as a result he has this huge slip with the and aa cp. they are fearful of how it will look for the black people to be arming themselves even though he did so after repeated attpt on his life. one of the things that the book shines a light on is the role that black women played in this as well. most people think this militant image of the panthers or this militant image of robert williams is a story of 1960 struggle. my book shows it's from the 1920s through the 1980s and black women are just as equally engaged and have this vibrant history in which they are pushing these ideas and more so than the men that we hds the new leaders of the movement. mabel williams, his wife, is a schoolteacher and was a destic

worker and became a schoolteacher. it's someone who is just as active in monroe working with him. ... >> freedom of speech for the protesters and demonstrators in charlottesville and afterwards, with has been considering the question of should we automatically refuse to disman free speech rights for anybody who is bearing articles and one with of the complicating factors

is that we did just apparently defend free speech rights for those bearing arm as so it's not a simple question at all. >> especially when you have the second amendment overlay like okay we'll take that one but not that one. and light of -- all of the years ago it always surprised him you know that he went overseas went to the army -- >> army in world war ii and they taught him how to shoot, how to kill and xted hill to go home and sit by shooting at the neighborhood. that was something that his -- yeah. >> and just to add toking that you know panthers did can it armed police patrols in 1986 it wasn't until a household name when they went to sac moan toe because designed to basically criminalize these panthers on police patrol so okay that everybody should exercise second amendment right and they did to police. and again they didn't shoot

might be but stood a safe distance away in order to reduce police harassment and only when they spilled on to the floor had in sacramento in attempt to go watch this vote that people kind of outside of oakland started to know about the black panthers in that way. so it's also really complicated about who get that right and at what time and what legislation comes in to criminalize people who amendment right when is don't like -- >> after the civil war during one of the major waves of -- relegating ann american to second class citizenship was not denying the vote but denying right to bear arms considered essential. >> yeah. yeah. fascinating history. so i have questions out there. my -- remember don't ask until you get microphone. make c-span producers happy. >> hi. thank you all for coming this was an incredible group to hear from. i had a question for ashley, i think that you were just

discussing how these movements oftentimes the turn towards like creator militarization or aggression is often figured as like a male impulse in your research, does, is that what is evident or -- is it more complicated than just like men are angry and -- >> yeah. so a part of this issue is that we tell history, you know, from the top down man to woman. so first people people kind of uncover particularly in minority communities since being the men at that particular group. however, one of the trends that you can kind of see throughout my book is -- that there is a strain of bck women since slavery who have argued for a ksmg couple of things king thely one of them is that, you know, there isn't going to be this reck arening in which the white community allows equal citizenship so as a result a lot of people should separate to form their own community in their own kind of economic ecosystems. as much as possible, the second

is, you know, that you ought fight fire with fire. we talk about the violence against men. but you know black women were alleged in high rates black women also sexually abused you know these domestic workers i'm talking about talk about you know carrying some knife or schiff with they will when they go to work as a deterrent from, you know, trying to make it through the the day of cleaning people's houses. and then you'll see for example, if you read the book lots of images of black women who were members of different -- black powered groups. being artists kind of creating revolutionary art and this this art, they are pposely drawing black women with guns. right they're personally drawing latino women guns and purposely draw aring them as kind of the defenders and protectors of the community. so that's one of the ways in which black women are trying to assert that they believe in this politics. and kind of reproduces politics but also say that really -- you know, the claim to this kind of revolutionary it life or or this black power life snot really maleness but your

equipment to militancy instead but across the board from the 20s to the 80s there's a strain of kind of self-defense militarism that -- you know the book is really trying to uncover that we haven't really looked at yet. >> maybe too complex to get into in this form. but why do you think that was? is it because -- what america feels armed black man not so much an armed black woman is that -- is that black male versus female -- or all of it? >> yeah i think some of it relies back to slavery about the big british black man an nothing kind of caught if id than had the firm of birth of a nation, as a turn of the century so question of this idea of this kind of black male, this quick with like animalistic tendencies that leads to domination and we sou that for example, when we talk about like ferguson and mike brown or shooting this idea

or trayvon martin right this idea that this -- man cannot exist in a world where he's not intent his life goal isn't to harm white people. right. but that also creating different role for black women on the one hand gives them more cause to protect themselves bauy know that while they may not have the same stereotype they are also seen as people that are strong, immune to pain. you know, deserving of violence. but also with, you know, in the sense that, you know, they're going to take it out these men then they need to be there to protect their communities as well. >> all right. thank you. question on the side how about down here? yep. up, up, to the microphone 237. the current issue of national geographic is devoted to race in america and the cover has a picture of two girls. one white, one black. which strongly affected me they're twin sisters i'm wondering how thought of that might affect you guys -- [inaudible conversations]

>> anybody want that one? [laughter] >> i'm like you it is interesting. very interesting. >> well, i mean, it's interesting too that they chose to represent it through women that's certainly about the moment that we're in. in terms of a political conscienceness to understand racism through the lens of women or two sisters or two young girls in that focus in that way. but beyond that -- >> i'm thinking of twin studies and sadly we can predict that there are different fates for those two people have so much in common that -- >> different experiences. >> separation -- given our climate. >> different. down front. wait for the magic microphone. >> we're going to run these volunteers ragged by the time we're done. so i think -- thing quen is for ashley. reading about the nation of islam and, you know, sort of

role that women play in that organization, obviously, women not just on the front lines but also running programs things like that and then there thenonhat seems to me between supporting men and also -- kskt advocating for themselves as full human beings and wondering what you thub that attention -- how it is -- >> so my -- my answer to this is whenever somebody asked me why i study black power. the common assumption is that black power was incredibly sexist right. so always odd to me because i don't know how it can be more or sexist than any other time period but it had gotten a bad wrap but they are three option option and it is exemplar so one is that you ac by and form a separate women's organization to

organize issues buzz you feel cycled. third option what my book is about and i think honestly the most viable most popular option is that you try to change that from within. you know, and specifically, you know, what you'll see from the women that i researched is this fo to kind of match their -- to kind of make them match their ideal right so you can't be out here talk the revolution in oppression all of this stuff but oppressing half of, you know, be oppressing other people in that standpoint. another great historian wrote a book about women in the natn of islam. it is called promise to pate patriarchy and shows women found value in the nation. right it does a lot for people. if gives you a space that's communal validate your beauty and at the same time has aspect so she talks about how they kind of outwardly go to this at the same time kind of behind the

scene it is that, you know, let me tell you what we're not going to do. [laughter] so there's that standpoint. i think some place like the panther party, you see them out really having it out in speeches and in the the black e pane panther newspaper, and you see minds change by 1970 newton is fully on board with women -- you know women's liberation and by the set -- early 70s folks like elaine brown are running the party entirely and it is actually mostly women at that point. and so -- i think it's one of the things to get across is one we should not see these as static things that we're more of a negotiation between folks even within an organization. and a second thing you know trying to get across is that people's minds do change. there are poem that may start this one space and really through this kind of struggle move to a really different space of understanding about women's roles or gender equality with et cetera. >> ashley you're reminding me of coins conditions that i describe in any book where there are

special and sensor the use of the black towers salute by women in particular. one, of course, was at the super bowl and other you remember a year or two ago -- female african-american graduate at west point. came to group picture and somehow, it seemed to be especially controversial and especially threatening that they were women kind of interesting. >> i mean i think another thing is superinteresting in terms of the speech and controversy too is that we have controversy about colin kaepernick and him kneeling how he's been -- and donald trump called that hate speech. >> but the wnba kneeling for far longer to a greater extent calling kaepernick ever did but there's something about their way of doing it that doesn't seem hateful or disrespectful of our symbolism and our flag and versus this black man or this series of black men doing so sphwroation see how even within

a minority group these kinds of ideas and what is hateful or unpatriotic or what's violent or inciting violent is different. >> how much of that is related to sort of american cultural sexism -- yeah. football players -- and women not so much. >> yeah football player, you know, people you know is to that stereotype to a extent there's something about wanting that kind of black male body to -- admit to idea of the american nation. it's the symbolism of the nation state that there's a problem with black women doing it but not so the tame extent because we can control black women bodies in other way but this is something where football player almost gets out of that. by virtue of being a hailed symbol by virtue of capitalism and so -- the way in which we make them submit is by agreeing to phil fit into a mold and when you don't you're out. yeah. >> it's fascinating. questions on this side. no there's --

yep. and then somebody behind you i think had a question. start with you and then -- >> great. so i have a qstion which is drengted at an expansionive view of free speech how does that grapple with what i see are two problems first is mingling of political ideology with violence white supremacy a portion of which believes in genocide of racist inther inferior races that produce likes of dylann roof. and with which i think minority populations have had to bear that burden as we can see in increase hate crimes and sort of accordance with the sort of hateful atmosphere speech we have with right now and i think second problem is -- it in expensive of view much free speech is speech as a marketplace -- and how does that work in the current context where technology people are able to choose and cure rate for themselves their own experiences and what they wish to be exposed to and in so osg become radicalized in adopt these ideology that sort of are political but then also

violent. >> two fantastic questions. so with respect to the first one, i want to be very clear that a so-called hate crime such what dylann roof engaged in -- is absolutely punishable and not only that, but is more subject to greater penalty than what would be the same crime but without the hateful motive right? so you take what would otherwise be a crime such as assault or a murder or vandalism and if the victim is deliberately singled out because be of the hateful or discriminatory reason, the community deem its that to be a -- more harmful crime. both to the -- individual directly affected and to society at large. so every state except one in the national government treats that as a hate crime subject to greater punishment. then when you're talking about speech that -- is divorced from an actual criminal act, if the speech is

very tightly linked to a crime or violence in a tight direct way, then the the speech may be punished. right, so intentional insightment of eminent violence threatening somebody in a way that instills fear in them that they're going to be subject to attack. that can and should be punished. but if we loosen up that causal connection and roll back to what used to be the standard before the civil rights movement, speech that had a harmful tendency that might indirectly perhaps at some point in the future lead to violence or lawlessness. that became a recipe for government to punish whatever ideas that liked and that was exactly why martin luther king wrote his famous letter from the birmingham jail that's why women who challenge laws that outlawed

contraception and abortion were in prison because that ep speech might leave somebody to break the law. so i agree, there's a risk in allowing speech that might potentially lead to violence. but in my mind it was a greater risk of empowering government which is going to be accountable to the status quo, to the powers that be, to the money, allowing government to say, oh that speech is potentially dangerous. and your second question was -- please one word -- it >> it's about how free speech and expanse based on idea that -- marketplace and ideas -- >> thank you so much. ofng the marketplace of ideas is no more well functioning than the economic marketplace and you specifly were asking about so again, it's like what is the lesser of two evils. do we distrust the marketplace more or government regulation and civil libation base on long

experience and advocate for right of whether it be political or racial or ethnic or sexual orientation you name it other minorities but definition who lack political power i'm not willing to trust the government. now, the posive aspect of these big tax companyies with their extraordinary power which i would like to see curbed in many ways but there's something positive which is not only does it make it easier to disperse most hateful speech, it also makes it easier to ro that speech effectively and my book contains a number of really inspiring examples of how we have changed people's minds i was thinking of when ashley was talking about that and a susan has a lot of experience with this directly where even confirm hate amongers leaders of hateful groups were engaged in very

patient and compassionate and everyone everyone thetic with chose who hated their ideas and did not treat them as a beyond. so saw in them some possibility of redemption. and really inspiring whole group called life after hate based this chicago -- that consist of nothing but former all white supremacist who saw the light and now are devoting their lives to preventing other it is from going that way or even recruiting them out. so i really do believe in the power of counterspeech and i think that, it's going to be amplified through the technology communication technology. we have to work hard, right? we've got challenges. but it's a powerful tool that can do a lot of good in resisting hatred. >> just a minor footnote to that one of my books was about dennis

versus u.s. -- 1940 first world war ii anti-trial, and law these guys were accused under and convicted and fellow supreme court serve up to nine years in prison, was needed illegal to advocate for the necessity of the u.s. government. or even to teach. to teach advocate and evidence against that things that they would written and things they had owned and conversations but one of them was sitting new york city councilman. but the the idea of communism was full to the government which at that time had authority to do this that these lost up to nine years of their lives. they saw years later and unworst part that have decision but this is what happens when you give them power to decide. >> but communist party was very closely working for civil rights and that was part of the reason why they were seen as hateful

and dangerous. >> many in the country and in the first chapter of my book some deported under smith act and many of them were jailed or husbands were jailed under the smith act and bause thrfsz a religion between, you know -- promoting civil rights or being -- you know, critiquing government for not living up to its principle of democracy andism is diverted all of that. >> that's why you can't ever give the government the right to muzzle because they decide who will muzzle and why. any questions on this side? one down here on the right. microphone person here -- sir i was lookingedt the back. >> my question was for susan you said there was a time where you stopped to go to sacramento to lobby for -- you know -- seek change or prevent harm from being done. but now that you are invited to different legislatures what have you found that has changed has it been -- the election of different state

representatives or -- just a moment has changed? >> i think there are few things that change when i stopped going to sacramento -- you know, let me inform you they began to organize the community. i began to develop a chapter of -- [inaudible conversations and it is a group that introduce the box for i begin to organize our community to build power. so you know this was 14, 13 years ago. and since then, a lot has shifted in the country around that incarceration. there's not enough that is shifted and not enough information and talk about the magic of women that are the largest growing segment of the prison system.

you know michelle alexander book shined a light on what was in the country and so there's a huge shift across the board you know, we had california that the federal government take over the medical system because it was taking over to the the system and under conservativeship and medical system, the numrs of people who were incarcerated, so money that's been spent incarcerated the type of crime that's be being -- people are being incarcerated for so all of this sort of built for steam and momentum around you know what do we do instead of what we've been doing. so that's been -- a large part of it. and then there are people incarcerated people all across the nation now there's so many of us and organizing ourselfves -- and we're standing and we're

pulling one another through, and we're standing up and we're changing laws you know one of the attorneys at a new way of life is a child custody attorney. i justired her last year. because we're losing so many of our children because i went to prison and what the court does is take my bean places it and hour or rei get her back or you'll never see him again. the other -- five attorneys at new way of life are attorneys that -- handle conviction relief and employment people around able to work. a couple of our clients went right here to the school. and they got social work degrees. and now they can't get a license. so we represent those clients. but much has shifted. there's more of us who are coming back into the community and we just want to be good citizens.

but if i can't have a house or job and i can't keep my kid what am i? what do i have to rebuild with? so -- you know, much has shifted since those days. 15 -- 16, 17 years ago. and one of them is the organizing and the power and the -- the determination not to lay down, not to give up. you know, not to say okay well you can do me anyway. no you can't do me anyway i deserve just as of as the next person. >> you're one of more compelling aspect of that whole movement nationally is what's going on with florida trying to get -- >> about to get it back. >> that's organizeing florida get the vote back. [laughter] [applause] yeah. so going to put on a big conference to bring from in about 500 incarcerated people and we're going to --

middle of september we're going to be there on the ground in florida. you know, saying, you know -- you want to become a citizen let me vote. isn't that good citizenship? so yes. it's important stuff and this side any question withs? any questions in the back? over here -- my question is i would like to know how we can do to prevent in a -- conservative forceses to use freedom of speech to protect corporations like for example, this case about unions and this case about, you know, like -- about campaign financing. so what can we do to prevent, you know, the first amendment to be used? you know, to protect corporations? >> that's a complicated question for this reason that concern some of my favorite organizations in the world are

corporations including the american civil liberties union. and the national association for the advancement of colored people to mention too the naacp to mention too they've been talked about here, and the laws have not drawn a distinction between not for profit advocacy corporationsnd -- for profit corporations, so susan you know how -- you've gone through the process of -- organizeing and some people many people have concluded that they can more effectively exercise their free speech rights if they ban together in not only associations but associations that have the various benefits of corporate status so i think we have to be a little bit more selective and -- ask how can we counter ideas that we dislike if we dislike how certain for profit

corporations are spending their money and by the way, the law also applies to labor unions. also wanted toth gaer their i think one of the most powerful wer the internet is use the to have full and immediate disclosure where contributions are going because then we can track and we can spotlight and we can criticize is a certain elected official, how much money is he or she getting from entities for that matter corporate or not because a lot of major donors now are very -- wealthy individuals and we wan to know that too right so i think the important point is -- the amount of money is it making a difference in how that politician is voting? and then we -- if leadinghem to talk votes or do other actions that are inking the with the public interest, then we should shine the spotlight on that.

and i think in recent elections that has been done. to quite an extent people have been embarrassed to accept money from certain organizations. i think that nra we can use a lot of advocacy now, and said no more discounts to the nra. yeah. public exposure. yeah. almost out of time here. like 90 seconding ago i think. and thank you all for coming in i would like to thank panelist books are ashley farmers remaking black power of women transform ared era. susan burton becoming ms. burton from prison to recovery are leading the fight for incarcerated women and hard cover version and advance one -- the i'm sorry hate -- we did, >> hate, what why we should resist it with free speech not censorship. >> that's -- that big words.

signing area is that way and folks help you where you need to know and i like to thank you all for coming and hope to see most of you back again tomorrow. thank you. [applause]