=
Ss
7

j

i

The

quiry

bea
—

junta

8edies

is the

| at the

On

heim,

Communist Youth Union of Chile
ternational Commission of In-

Military Junta in Chile opened in
Mexico City on February 18.
Many U.S. senators and con-
ressmen want the Mexico ses-
Sion to be a success. I had an
Opportunity of seeing this during
My trip to the United States late
ast year. Many of them con-
demn the actions of the fascist

country, the United States of
America, to be associated with
4 the aggression against other na-
tions, with economic boycotts,
Participation in the preparations
Of fascist putsches, or other tra-

Striving for freedom.
A striking illustration of this
attitude of the U.S. congressmen

| €xpose the crimes of the junta

Propriations Subcommittee ex-
actly at a time when military aid
| to Latin American countries was
| discussed there. a

I was invited ‘to Philadelphia
to attend an assembly of the
Oung (Communist) Workers’.
| Liberation League. That I was
| Permitted to enter the country
| Was a political victory of the ©
| U.S. forces of solidarity with the
Struggle of the Chilean people.

On the anniversary day of the fascist junta.
Universal Declaration of Human
Rights I visited the UN head- with Kurt Waldheim, a mass
quarters and met representatives meeting of protest against the
| Of many countries there.

More doors open to Chile solidarity

By GLADYS MARIN»
General Secretary,

Third Session of The In-

Into the Crimes of the

and do not want their

suffered by the peoples

fact that I was allowed to

Senate Foreign Aid Ap-

human rights on the part of the

At a time when I was talking

crimes of fascism in Chile was
the same day I met UN _ going onnear the UN building in

Secretary-General, Kurt Wald- New York.

who expressed his great On the last day of the General

anxiety and concern for the ear- Assembly session I met Assem-
ly implementation of the General bly President Abdelaziz Boute-
} Assembly resolution demanding flika who showed keen interest
| 4n end to: the violations of in early implementation of the

Paris Accords

In an interview in Hanoi, Jan. two pressing and righteous de-
25, Le Dac Tho! Politbureau mands of the Provisional Revo-

| ™ember of the Vietnamese

lutionary government — (1) to
put an immediate end to, the

Assembly’s Chile resolution.
It was in the United Nations
again that I saw one of the re-

presentatives of the fascist junta,

Sergio Onofre Jarpa, president
of the pro-fascist National Party.
He was strolling along the UN
cerridors alone. Another group
of junta representatives was in
similar isolation. They felt gene-
ral hostility. But, at the same
time, they watched, with hatred
and cowardly despair, how one
of the representatives of the
Chilean people, a member of the
Parliament abolished by them,
was received by. the highest-
ranking officials of the United
Nations,. and how ,a reception
was given by UN .official quart-
ers specially for her, which was
attended by the envoys of more
than 40 states, while more than
50 journalists accredited at the

INTERNATIONAL WOMEN’S YEAR ‘75

equal pay

It is important this year to keep major issues in the fore-
front of our struggle for-women’s rights. There are so many
areas in which inequality manifests itself, both directly and
indirectly, that, while fighting for full equality on the job,
in education and in the home and from day-to-day, working
to implement practice of the theory of equality, the major
political campaign must centre around economic issues.

The campaign for equal rights must be clearly defined in
the context of the struggle for working class power as a
whole. For without such a perspective, the issues and how
to tackle them become clouded. It is in this respect that the
IWY program of the federal government must be exposed.

Many individuals and organizations are criticizing the
government’s ‘Why Not’ campaign, but the significance of

‘this slogan as the reflection of a whole policy is not clear.

The government’s policy is a do-nothing policy which at-
tempts to cloud the focus of the women’s movement.,
The ‘Why Not’ campaign encourages women to ask for
equality from those whose interests are served by in-
equality but provides no significant mechanisms or legisla-
tion for women to use as a tool. It attempts to portray the
campaign for women’s rights as a struggle of individuals,

instead of a widely-based fight, which involves the whole.

working class. :

“It?s not a slogan, it’s an attitude,” lament advertise-
ments in national newspapers, ‘An attitude that says no
one will ever again deny you an opportunity just because
you’re a woman. That no one will ever pay you less money
than a man when you perform the same job as a man. The
next time prejudice or precedent says, ‘No you can’t’,
you're going to ask, ‘Why not?’” A lot of well worded, well
designed advertisements can’t hide the total insignificance
of the government’s International Women’s Year campaign
and its attempts to draw attention away from substantial
demands.

Women in Canada have been asking governments “Why
not?’ since the turn of the century, when law stated that
“no criminal, lunatic or woman shall vote.” It was only
through a collective struggle and constant pressure on the
government that Canadian women won the vote. It first
happened in Manitoba, through an election campaign that
brought a Tory government down because of their refusal
to change the law.

The basis of the struggle has not changed. The pettiness
of a campaign such as we are now being subjected to by
the Canadian government is obvious in the face of the real
issues, and what the government should be doing to provide
the basis for women’s equality. When the question is looked
at in relation to working class oppression as a whole, the
real issues and how they must be dealt with become clear,
and the strength of the women’s movement grows. This is
what the federal government is trying to fight with its
‘Why Not’ campaign.

petal

Ask government

@ ‘Why not?

eee

perkers pees denounced the U.S. military intervention and United Nations, were present at .
| United States for violating the jts interference in the internal her press-conference. e e e
| Vietnam agreement over the affairs of South Vietnam and (2)
| Past two years, and stressed. “It to overthrow the regime of
: the Vietnam people’s resolute Thieu and his crew, and in Sai-
Struggle aimed at defeating all gon to establish a regime of na-
 maneouvers of the U.S. and tional concord, which is in favor
the Thieu regime, that can force of the. implementation of the
|} “em to fulfill the promise they Vietnam Agreement.

Minister Responsible for the Status of Women, Marc
Lalonde, kicked off his government’s ‘Why Not’ campaign
with-a cocktail party for top business executives in private
industry, crown corporations, the federal public service
and judiciary. ~ :

“Managers and vice-presidents of commercial banks said

Artists boycott

| Made
| Signed

—_——

”

Le Duc Tho said “We are con-

and the Agreement they
vinced that people all over the

If the United States wants the world will give strong support
h eement to be implemented, to the Vietnamese people in
7€ continued, it must meet the their struggle.”

Atte

for peace and an end to U.S. ai ; none
strated for six hours in front of the U.S. embassy in Saigon

and were deported the same day.

=

SAIGON (LNS) — Americans distributing leaflets calling
d to Thieu. They demon-

junta’s festival

The fascist junta’s attempts to
stage the 10-year-old Vina del
Mar International Song Festival
in Chile proved a miserable fail-
ure. Over the years, the Festival
had attracted many Chilean and
foreign pop singers, and they be-
came particularly popular during
the Unidad Popular government.

Invitations issued by the jun-
ta’s Festival organizers brought
an outburst of indignation
among Latin American cultural
workers. —

“By staging such a Festival,”
said the Peruvian Actors Union,
“the junta wants to distract
world public attention from the
crimes it has committed, and to
create a semblance of normaliza-
tion of the situation in that
country.” It urged Peruvian sin-
gers to refuse to attend the Fes-
tival.

“J would gladly sing my songs
for the Chilean people who suf-
fer from the junta’s atrocities
and for the patriots kept in pris-
ons, but I shall never sing for
the junta,” said the Venezuelan
singer, Maria -Teresa Chasin,
who is the winner of many inter-
national awards.

very earnestly that most women just.don’t want to climb
very high,” reported the Globe and Mail. A boss of that
company renowned for its exploitation of women, Bell
Canada, explained that men are chosen for management
training over women because women get married and leave
the work force. President of: Robert Simpson Co. spoke for
equality when he said that “our women don’t want to go
into management.” And Marc Lalonde made the comment
to the almost exclusively male group that the ‘Why Not’
campaign was the most successful that the government
had ever had.

Here is a defacto illustration of what must be criticized
in the government’s campaign. Not only is it cbvious, from
the comments made at Lalonde’s party, that asking ‘Why
Not’ will do nothing for winning equal rights, but that the
whole focus of the campaign skirts the major issues.
Women’s equality does not centre around the number of
women who are in management positions, because the
majority of us will never be. What is necessary is legisla-
tion to ensure equal pay for work of equal value at every
level of production; facilities and funds for universal day
care so that women will have equal opportunity to become
part and stay part of the work force; paid maternity leave
and laws which ensure women this leave. What is needed is
significant reform in education to remove sexism and

_ streaming from schools; legislation against the promotion

of the stereotyped images of women, from the media and
from advertising. Such reforms as these will not only
change the unequal opportunities of women, but will
change the image of women and of their role in society.

Is Mr. Lalonde planning a cocktail party to wind up his
government’s IWY campaign, and evaluate its effectiveness
on the status of women? I doubt it!

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 1975—Page 7