Dale Brumfield Archives - Read. Think. Act.

The Underground Free Press with Dale Brumfield

(January 30, 2019) Catherine Read interviews Cultural Archeologist Dale Brumfield about the history of the Underground Press. Brumfield has written two books on the topic, the Independent Press in DC and Virginia, and the Richmond Independent Press.

The Underground Press was born out of the Free Speech movement, which originated in Berkley, California. Opposition to the Vietnam War united students who disagreed with America’s involvement in Vietnam. Students across the country banded together to elevate their voice, and the Underground Press emerged. The purpose of these publications was to find voices of dissidence, and to challenge conventional wisdom.

The very first Underground Press publication was the LA Free Press, which was first printed and distributed in 1964. Shortly thereafter in 1966, Tom and Joyce Debaggio produced the Underground in Arlington, VA . Their publication was not as much about the counter-culture, as it was a serious publication looking for alternative points of view. The paper stayed in production for approximately two years. Brumfield was fortunate to have the opportunity to interview Joyce for his book, and she shared the obstacles and challenged that they faced trying to get their paper out into the hands of the people who wanted to read it.

In late 1966 the Washington Free Press started as an inter-collegiate underground newspaper, and evolved by 1967 into a collective-run publication. The paper was produced out of a house in DC, where all involved in the work had equal say in how the paper was shaped. Those who produced the paper lived together and worked together, which posed its own set of problems. However, having a larger group of people working on the paper meant that there were more people working together to get the paper distributed in the community.

The galvanizing force behind the emergence of these publications was the anti-war movement. As time moved on, the Free Press publications adopted other counter-culture movements such as women’s liberation, gay rights and the black power. When the US decided to end the draft in 1972, and then withdraw from Vietnam altogether in 1974, the driving force behind the Free Press publications withered away. Many of these papers saw an end of their run by this time.

In the second segment of the show Catherine and Dale speak about the history of the FBI and the CIA in infiltrating some of these Free Press publications. Although the CIA is specifically not allowed to spy on American citizens, they did work their way into the Free Press movement by convincing higher ups that the Free Press had to have been organized by foreign governments looking to infiltrate American institutions. They launched two investigations, Operation Chaos and Operation Merrimac, to find out more about the inner workings of the Free Press movements. These operations did not yield any evidence of misdoings, as those involved with the Free Press were not operating on behalf of anyone other than themselves.

The FBI attempted to infiltrate the movement by producing their own phony rendition of a Free Press paper on the campus of American University in Washington, DC. Their paper, titled the “Rational Observer” was designed to introduce a moderate voice to the movement, and changes hearts and minds. They also sent agents undercover into the counter-culture movements to gain information and better understand the resistance movement.

As journalism has evolved over the years, and the introduction of cable news channels and the Internet have emerged, there are now more alternative voices than ever before. Today, those voices on the right have been amplified through vehicles like the Alt-Right and the Dark Web. Social media, and sites like “Info Wars” are the free press of the modern times, and often exist to spin the news and espouse conspiracy theories without proof or evidence-based journalism. They exist to fortify and reinforce the beliefs of their viewers. As consumers of modern day journalism, it is important to understand what news is being consumed and also be able to identify the difference between opinion pieces and actual reporting of the truth.

by Rachel Simon

Gay Rights Movement with Dale Brumfield

(January 23, 2019) Catherine Read sits down with Cultural Archeologist Dale Brumfield, to talk about the history of the Gay Rights Movement. Looking back to the administration of Dwight D. Eisenhower, Brunfield outlines the struggle faced by so many LGBTQ individuals, and the ongoing fight for equality.

This year will mark the 10^th year in a row that the Virginia General Assembly will introduce bills to protect LGBTQ people from housing and employment discrimination. These bills do not ask for special treatment for LGBTQ individuals, only equal protection under the law. In years past, these bills have made their way out of the Senate, but failed to gain passage through the House of Delegates. This year, there are two bills regarding employment non-discrimination (SB 998 and HB 2067), and four bills about fair housing non-discrimination (SB 1109, SB 1232, HB 2677 and HB 1823) that are being introduced. These bills are working their way through committee and will hopefully make it to the floor for a full floor vote in both chambers.

Looking back to 1953 when President Dwight D. Eisenhower issued Executive Order 10450, our history shows that it was commonplace to be able to fire someone for being gay. There was systemic discrimination throughout the federal workforce, and society in general, against homosexuals. Gay people were labeled as sexual deviants, and thus regularly shunned. FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover was notorious for investigating those suspected of being gay, and formulating memos on people that dated back to the 1920’s. This was also during the time of McCarthyism, when many Americans were wrongly accused of being communists, and the two issues were often conflated. Many people who were even suspected of being gay were singled out and fired from government jobs, or shamed to the point of committing suicide.

There was one government astronomer name Frank Kameny who, instead of giving up when he was fired, decided to fight the injustice. He joined forces with Jack Nichols to form the Mattachine Society in Washington, D.C. In addition to acting as a support group for gay people, the Mattachine Society worked to raise awareness and fight for civil rights. Kameny was no stranger to Washington, as his father was an FBI agent, so he changed his name to Warren Adkins to avoid putting his father’s career in danger.

The gay rights movement began to churn forward, and chapters of the Mattachine Society began popping up in other large American cities, such as New York and Los Angeles. Mike Wallace of CBS News hosted the first mainstream documentary about the movement in 1967 entitled “The Homosexuals”, and Walter Adkins was interviewed for the show.

At the same time, gay publications were beginning to flourish. The first gay magazine was called One: The Homosexual Magazine, which mostly existed as an underground publication. Interestingly enough, it was rolled off the presses at the same time as the first Playboy magazine. Ironically, ONE was considered to be obscene, and the US Postal Service refused to allow the magazine to be sent through the mail, even though it contained no pictures or imagery. The irony was that Playboy could be sent through the mail, even though it contained nude photos. The publishers of One took the case to the Supreme Court and won, and the magazine survived and thrived for another 25 years.

The first widely circulated newspaper to serve the gay community was the Gay Blade (now called the Washington Blade), first published in Washington DC in 1969. The newspaper brought the gay community together, and chronicled LGBTQ news locally, nationally and internationally. In 1968, the Stonewall Riots in NYC were considered the first big act of the gay rights movement that gained national attention. These events were a jumping point for activists who were looking to gain civil right protections.

To this day, the LGBTQ community are still looking for equal protections under the law. Even after marriage equality was passed in the Supreme Court in 2015 with the Obergefell vs. Hodges case, and the federal workforce is protected with nondiscrimination, states like Virginia still lag behind in offering protections for LGBTQ individuals in regards to housing and employment.

by Rachel Simon

The Women’s Liberation Movement with Dale Brumfield

(Jan. 16, 2019) Catherine Read sits down with Cultural Archeologist Dale Brumfield, for a discussion about the history of the women’s liberation movement. As Virginia kicks off the 2019 legislative session, the Commonwealth is poised to be the 38^th state to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment to the US Constitution. Brumfield provides some history and context of the movement, and what brings us to this moment in time.

Brumfield begins by sharing the history of the women’s liberation movement. It was sparked in 1968, when the leftist hippie counter-culture movement was getting started. Women were brought into the coalition, to essentially provide cover for the men when dealing with the police during protests. When marching or protesting, the men who ran the movement would put the women up front in the marches so that the police would not attack them or use tear gas. When the women started to understand the dynamics of their situation, they decided to break from the ranks and start their own movement.

During the 1968 Miss America pageant, women waged the first large group protest of the movement, coming together to denounce the entire premise of the beauty pageant. The New York Post falsely reported that women were burning their bras, when in reality they were tossing them in the ceremonial “freedom trash can”. Women in support of the women’s liberation movement were forever stereotyped as “bra-burning” radicals. The bad press was hard to shake, so the women decided to take control of their own messaging.

Marilyn Webb, a Virginian, was at the head of the movement at the time. She ambitiously founded Magic Quilt in 1968, designed to help organize the disparate women’s groups nationwide, and help mobilize and the ranks. The task proved to be too daunting, and she did not succeed in establishing Magic Quilt as the umbrella organization for the women’s liberation movement.

She did, however, successfully launch the first news magazine that was dedicated to women’s issues called “Off Our Backs”. Many people think that Gloria Steinem with Ms. Magazine was the first feminist publication of its type, but “Off our Backs” hit the printing press in 1970, several years before Ms. The magazine was meant to set the stage for, and define the narrative about, women’s issues.

Much of the coverage of the movement by the mainstream media was negative, so the purpose of the magazine was to change the tune and offer an alternative voice. At the time, Webb was unable to find anyone in Virginia to actually print the magazine, so they traveled to Atlanta to find a publisher. Off Our Backs continued publishing for 38 years, although they eventually transitioned to online publishing before closing shop in 2008. Archives of the publication can be found online.

Throughout the history of the United States, women have had to fight for equality in so many ways. From suffrage, to entering the workforce and even being able to own their own credit card without their husband’s co-signature, women have had an uphill battle every step of the way. Brumfield notes that it is challenging to maintain a movement over a long, sustained period. There are certain moments in time that spark a light to continue the fight.

Many women found the 2016 election, and the #metoo movement that followed, to be such a moment. Women have been inspired to take things into their own hands, and run for office in record numbers on the local, state and federal level. Here in Virginia, we elected three women to Congress in 2018. As women continue to get elected and hold office, he believes that progress will follow.

(update: The State Senate passed the ERA amendment on the first day of session, however the House of Delegates voted the bill down in committee, along party lines).

by Rachel Simon

Virginians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty

(Sept. 3, 2018) Catherine Read sits down with Dale Brumfield, Field Director for Virginians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty (VADP). Dale took over this position last year, after authoring a book about the Virginia State Penitentiary System, and penning several opinion pieces on the topic for a variety of Virginia based news publications. As field director for VADP, he seeks to engage a variety of grass roots constituent groups, from progressive to conservative to libertarian to evangelical and beyond.

The death penalty has early roots in Virginia’s history. The first man to be put to death in the New World was Cpt. George Kendall, killed by firing squad in 1608 for treason. Later in 1632, the colony put the first woman to death for the crime of concealing childbirth. Since then, the death penalty has been used far and wide in the commonwealth, where over 1300 people have been executed in its 400+ year history. The practice gained popularity in the 1800’s, born from an unreliable prison system that was unable to secure its residents. Many things have changed since then, and Brumfield argues that death sentences should no longer used. However, 31 states still bring capital punishment cases to trial.

Brumfield makes the case that in addition to being morally wrong (the Old Testament clearly states “Thou shall not kill” in the ten commandments), the use of the death penalty is a waste of both time and money. It costs 4-10x as much to bring a capital punishment case to trial versus a non-death penalty case. This does not even take into account the appeals process, which adds many more hundreds of thousands of dollars to the cost.

When speaking with those who support the practice, one the of biggest complaints that Brumfield hears is that people do not want their tax dollars to have to pay for someone to sit in jail. They would rather have the guilty defendant put to death. In reality this is a false argument, because it actually winds up costing the state much more to bring a death penalty case to trial. Additionally, there is the cost of having the convicted felon sit on death row for what often amounts to decades. For example, in California they have had over 700 people on death row, but the state rarely executes anyone. Since 1978, when the death penalty was reinstated, the state has spent 14 billion dollars in death row costs but has only put 13 people to death.

Attitudes toward the death penalty have changed significantly over the past 20 years. In 1999, 75% of those surveyed supported the use of capital punishment. Today, that number has dropped to 54%, up slightly from an all-time low of 49% in 2016, according to a Pew research study. Since 2011 there has not been one death sentence issued by a jury in Virginia, and there are currently 3 people awaiting execution. Compared to 1999 when there were 60 people on death row, Brumfield points out that the Virginia is making great strides in reducing the number of people being sent to death row.

One of the main reasons that there has been such a drastic reduction in capital punishment cases can be tied to the establishment in 2004 of the Capital Defense offices. Four regional offices were opened, staffed with highly competent defense attorneys who would take on these high profile cases. In the past, many of the defendants who were poor and minority could not afford their own counsel. The court would appoint an attorney, but often times these lawyers were not equipped to handle such complex cases. The prosecution would run circles around the ill equipped court appointed attorneys, and many more death sentences were given. The establishment of these offices helped to even the playing field, causing prosecutors to drastically reduce the number of capital punishment cases that they brought to trial.

Blumfield also points out that the death penalty is biased along racial lines. A research study done in Virginia showed that a person is three times as likely to be sentenced to death when the victim is white vs. when the victim is black (VJLRC study, 2000). Additionally, while African Americans represent only 13% of the overall population, they make up 42% of those on death row, and 35% of those executed.

From a legislative perspective, Brumfield is working with the Virginia General Assembly on two main initiatives. The SMI bill (Severe Mental Illness) is designed to make sure that no person with an IQ of 70 or less is executed. Recently, a young man with an IQ of 56 admitted to a crime he did not commit and was given the death penalty. He was proven innocent through DNA testing, but he came within 7 days of being put to death before he was exonerated. This year, Brumfield will also be working on a bill addressing drug secrecy of the injection cocktail used for executions in Virginia. There has been quite a bit of controversy over this practice, and this bill is designed to shine a spotlight on the ingredients being used for these cases.

VADP is holding a luncheon in Reston to raise funds to support their work. Joe Giarratano, a man who served 38 years for a crime he did not commit, will be an honored guest. Actor Mike Farrell (better known as B.J. Hunnicutt on MASH) will be the keynote speaker. For over 30 years he has been working in California to abolish the death penalty. Details and signup information can be found on their website.