“Goodbye to the purveyors of gold teeth grills and shea butter body oils. Hello prepackaged salads and slim-fit khakis”. In these two sentences Jeremiah Moss is able to symbolically define the changes that have continued to occur in New York City. The poor people have been driven out and the rich business men continue to flock in. Places that used to have cheap rent have now become part of the most expensive areas to live in. These changes have not only been detrimental to those displaced but also to the city as a whole.

Moss discusses the specifics of the gentrification that has continued to occur in Brooklyn and in Queens as well. He gives many specific examples of areas that have experienced this shift and explains why this occurs. The whole drive behind gentrification is money. As areas become more popular business men jump on the opportunity to profit off of it. Moss also mentions social media’s impact on the process. Social media gets the word out so quickly about these changes. So, people can immediately see what areas are becoming “cool” and start moving their attention to those areas. Next thing you know, rent has been tripled, small restaurants have been replaced with big name eateries and everything is more expensive.

Among the specific places that were changed, Moss highlights Williamsburg and Bedford-Stuyvesant. Both of these areas were occupied by low income families and featured many mom and pop shops. Fast forward to today and everything is different. They are both featured among the most expensive rent in New York and it’s very sad to hear the stories of those who have been displaced. They were the ones that made the area what it is and next thing they know they are kicked out.

One specific case of people being kicked out was very recently during the project of building the Barclays Center in Brooklyn. Moss notes the son of a Holocaust survivor who draws a parallel between the Holocaust and the gentrification that occurred. He says that just like the Holocaust took everything away for his father, here comes the government again taking away everything from him. A comparison like this is so powerful in portraying just how tragic gentrification has been on the affected individuals.

But without knowing the fight that went into building these areas in the first place it is difficult to truly see why a comparison like this can be made. In the book Activist New York, Jaffe discusses the efforts of the people to maintain and build up the downtrodden areas they lived in. In 1975 the government ran out of money and many poverty-stricken areas lost all support they received and were decreased to nothing. But the people refused to back down and several organizations were created to fight the problem. EBC really took control of these efforts and helped rebuild many areas in New York City for the poor. Bedford-Stuyvesant was one of these places. Had they known that later on their efforts would be for nothing would they have gone to all that trouble? That shows the tragedy of gentrification in NYC.

IF

ACT-UP is an international advocacy group working to impact the lives of individuals with AIDS to bring about legislation, medical research and treatment and policies to ultimately bring an end to the disease. The group has been known to enter into areas defined as “sacred spaces” to carry out their messages to the public. As shown in class, the sacred spaces included City Hall, the White House, and St.Patricks Church. The motive behind utilizing these sacred spaces was to generate any form of attraction to their cause from the biggest audiences. The effectiveness of such actions, however, in my opinion, is a little obscured. The protests and gatherings in City Hall, appeared to be effective because the space they were in permitted for voices to be heard and government officials to hear. Moreover, in a place like the White House, the area is a public area where any human being has rights to walk, run, protest etc. Therefore, I do believe that using the White House front lawn as a sacred space was effective because such a prominent building was challenged by a group that is being betrayed by the people who run that building. An image like that in the public’s mind put the AIDS epidemic into perspective for people who are part of ACT-UP but also bystanders. However, I believe the use of the church as a sacred space was ineffective. As seen in the video, there was a service being carried out and the groups stormed in and began shouting, interrupting what was going on. In my opinion, no matter what group you are advocating for or the cause, there must be respect to what is actually sacred. Also, I believe that because it was in a church, the group pushed people away and intensified the conflicts between the church and the organization.

The movements for police brutality and criminal justice can learn from ACT-UP because their methods of protesting did change the dynamic of the problem. The movements should push towards educating the ignorant and finding areas where they can truly reach their surroundings and ignite real change. 

Sarah Shafik

1. What is the legacy of the Young Lords Party?

The New York City Young Lords Organization, was founded by a group of mostly Puerto Rican students from SUNY-Old Westbury, Queens College and Columbia University. They were inspired by the Black Panther Party  and a group called the Young Lords in Chicago, Illinois. The Chicago Young Lords were a former street organization that had gained national attention when they took over a local church in order to provide child care, a breakfast program and other community-oriented programs. Many of the original Young Lords had been involved in the student and anti-war movements and wanted to apply the skills gained in that work to creating a community-based revolutionary organization. The Young Lords organized both on campuses and in their communities. They continued to build an autonomous student movement, while at the same time training students to be community organizers. They recognized that the community needed to feel ownership over institutions of higher education, and fought for colleges that served their needs. And the Young Lords realized that building a revolutionary organization means investigating the issues that the community is already struggling with in some way. As revolutionaries they sought to make tangible gains on the issues the community found important.

2. Why do they matter for today?

An impactful organization such as the Young Lords is important for today because the generations that have come after and will come are ones that mirror the actions and progression of this party. As a group that advocated for their fellow Puerto Ricans, they generated a sense of optimism for a better future for the current generation. The Young Lords’ devotion and zeal towards their fight for change is something that people with a desire for a change will see as inspiration and echo it. Moreover, as a group that has a forgotten legacy, it is difficult to grasp their value but in the Latino communities, this party serves as a way out of the political, economic, and social wrongdoings carried out against them.

   3. How does the film frame the answers for those questions? NOT PRESENT IN CLASS. 

Sarah Shafik

ACT UP used sacred spaces including hospitals, churches, and politically symbolic places for their demonstrations. They craved for a direct response and direct action from the United States government and medical establishments, who the organization believed were inadequately addressing the AIDS epidemic. Activists demanded the FDA to approve certain drugs and drug trials to be made available. ACT UP led the first “Stop the Church” protest at St. Patrick’s Cathedral where they interrupted Mass, chanted slogans, and layed down in the aisles. Activists disagreed with the church’s stand against safe sex education in public schools, condom distribution, and the church’s views on homosexuality and abortion. As a result, ACT UP was viewed as representing militancy and disrespect by Mayor Edward Koch. The organization also distributed safer-sex packets outside of Seattle high schools that contained information on how to have sex safely. The act was condemned illegal as it was harmful to minors and distributing sexually explicit material to underage people was unlawful. Furthermore, activists dumped the ashes of passed loved ones who suffered from AIDS on the White House lawn.

Evidently, ACT UP strategically targeted sacred spaces that both gave them more media coverage, but also ignited emotions amongst those that were against the organization, ultimately allowing ACT UP to reach those that were ignorant. However, the organization also faced some backlash from the government and society for violating sacred spaces. As a result, the morality of their actions were scrutinized. After all, churches are places of worship, schools are places for education, and the White House is government property. Disturbing worship, influencing young minds, and attacking the top of the government hierarchy can be seen in a negative light. However, it effectively strengthened the point ACT UP desired to make. Distributing worship was viable in the eyes of activists because the same church that didn’t want to be disrespected, was disrespecting and oppressing the ideas and faith of activists who supported homosexuality and free choice. The church, a powerful institution of morality, was acting immoral when condemning those with AIDS, as it was the fault of their illegitimate homosexual desires. Equally important, school is supposed to provide education and safety for its students, however keeping them away from knowledge of safe sex wasn’t keeping them away from sex, rather was leading them to make unsound choices in their sexual lives. Sexual education was destigmatized because of ACT UP’s efforts. Even more, ACT UP was using their right of protest in blaming the government for the loss of their loved ones. The government was clearly ignoring a large epidemic, failing to provide its people with the resources and help they needed. Thus, for ACT UP to want to protest against the government was not only legally sound, but a result of the government’s inadequacy.

Sacred spaces are sacred because they serve their communities. If a large group of people believe that these places themselves are defying their fundamental values, why should they be condemned for demanding what is theirs’ on a humanitarian level? The fact was that the institutions like churches, hospitals, and schools didn’t want activists to be quiet in just their respective sacred space, but be quiet everywhere else in society as well. Activists didn’t damage property or attack people, rather held benign demonstrations in the places they knew would enrage many. They reinvented the form of protests by not just chanting or carrying signs, but by blocking traffic with their bodies, proving that their goals were even more valuable than their lives. Activists were unapologetically confrontational which is why their efforts were fruitful. They gave anger a purpose.

I think activists today must learn from activists in history. While activism achieves a lot for society, there are also negative facets we must try to rectify. For example, many believed ACT UP to be a racist organization. After all, racism was prevalent in the society and an organization led by middle class white men had to exhibit some as well. However, instead of viewing ACT UP in a monolithic way, we must realize how activism can be better today. In terms of using sacred spaces today, I don’t think much has changed. With the rise in hate crimes that target institutions like mosques and churches, demonstrating in such places will be as challenging and consequential as it was years ago. What is different about today, however, is the fact that religious people themselves are starting to become more open-minded and adjust to the attitudes in society. 

-K.A

How to Survive a Plague recounts the story of Act-Up an advocacy group designed to propagate the voices of the numerous individuals suffering from AIDS. Act-Up was created in order to bring awareness of the rising deaths due to AIDS and the lack of governmental help and intervention towards find a solution to save numerous human lives. As the AIDS epidemic plagued the 1980s, much of the LGBT community was left to fend for themselves, often not even getting the chance to get a bed at a hospital. By inciting the Act-Up movement, the LGBT community was able to rally around the need to find a cure in order to prevent the hundreds of lives lost every day.

The utilization and occupation of “sacred space” was an important aspect towards the overall success of the movement. The movement used various “sacred spaces” in order to amplify and distribute their message. For example, hundreds of members marched to the White House lawn and poured the ashes of their dead loved ones, on the lawn grass. Such actions were monumental steps towards garnering attention for their cause. The movement also led many members to occupy a catholic church during mass and chant their messages. Members of Act-Up used the church as a way to blame the organized religions for advocating the murders of many gay individuals. Additionally, many advocates also marched to City Hall, knowing the media presence and used the media to spread their message.

The actions taken by the movement at several sacred spaces, allowed the group to utilize their surroundings to spread their message. They used people’s uncomfortability as a weapon for their cause. By occupying the various “sacred spaces”, they were able to urge organized religions, politicians and hospitals to accept the fact that AIDS was a rapidly rising concern for the LGBT community and that there was a great need for change.

The messages and the actions taken by the Act-Up movement can serve as a basis for many movements such as environmentalism. By grabbing the attention of the people through the use of unorthodox methods, movements such as environmentalism can raise awareness for the issue of racism in the environmentalism movement. By utilizing sacred spaces such as conventions or community centers, individuals can voice the need for minority representation in the environmentalism movement. Rather than becoming extremists, by utilizing a strategic movement, mirroring Act-Up, minorities too can make a change for the betterment of their communities.

– S.Q

“United we stand, divided we fall.” In times of crisis, it’s imperative that a nation comes together as one collective unit. But in the 1980’s AIDS crises that we faced, the country was anything but supportive. Ignorant to the thousands of deaths of gay men, society carried on living their lives pretending that others were being deprived of this option. However, the ACT-UP organization took a stand and spoke for those that were being suppressed.  Consisting of both victims and those who were trying to make a difference, the ACT UP group used non-violent protests to project their voice over all those oblivious to the seriousness of the situation. Furthermore, they conducted these protests in “sacred spaces” to efficiently convey their message and to catch the attention of the nation.

Often seen as controversial, the use of “sacred space” was a critical piece of the ACT UP movement. They invaded hospitals to talk about how such institutions served to care and cure-all withheld treatment from those suffering from Aids. Furthermore, they stormed Catholic churches accusing them responsible for metaphorically and quite literally killing the LGBT community.  In a space where countless are worshipping God and praying for others, it was necessary for them to acknowledge the pain being inflicted upon gays. Moving from religious institutions to political institutions, the ACT UP organization stood loud and proud on the front lawn of the country’s home: The White House. Pouring the ashes of those that were lost to the unfortunate disease, ACT UP reminded the government that they needed to be responsible for their actions and needed to start taking care of all their citizens. Though unconventional, the approach the ACT UP group used was pivotal in showing the blatant disregard the nation was showing when their people needed them the most.

Mahatma Gandhi once said, ” In a gentle way, you can shake the world.” Using words instead of actions can seem anything but empowering and a slow way to instill change. Nonetheless, all wars are not fought by guns. The ACT UP movement stood as inspiration for many peaceful protests to come after. Using media coverage, they effectively reached all minds even those trying to “forget”. It’s not always about winning, but more importantly, being heard and showing the world you’re not scared to speak up.

My group’s topic is affirmative action. ACT UP lives as a perfect example of activism around my topic. Using non-violent means such as peaceful protests. Similarly,  like the ACT UP group, the affirmative action community is greatly diversified and has strength in numbers. Taking away from the ACT UP strategies, affirmative action protesters should seek help from media coverage to bolster their cause and amplify their voice. Most importantly, the ACT UP group teaches all that to make a difference, one should not stick to the ordinary means but be bold in trying to reach the minds of those that refuse to listen.

– Arya Sanghavi

ACT-UP needed to find ways to get what they wanted fast. More of their people were dying every single day so they couldn’t afford to extend their movement at all. That’s where they began to use ‘sacred space’ in order to get their message across. The ‘sacred space’ they protested at included City Hall, the White House lawn, the Catholic Church and even at a hospital. Each one of these places holds high importance thereby increasing the publicity they received for their protests. That publicity is exactly what they needed to speed up their demands.

In the protests, they blamed the people for causing the deaths of their loved ones and continuing to allow them to lose their lives. Specifically, in their protest by the White House lawn, they poured the ashes of their loved ones that died from AIDS right on the lawn. This act really sparked up awareness showing the whole entire country that they would not go down without a fight. By gaining the viewing of the entire country their movement become much greater. This showed how public actions like this can be so powerful and can really invoke change.

In the activism against religious violence they can learn from here how to effectively spread awareness of the issue. If they can expose more people to the issue then they can attack the incorrect stereotypes right on the nose. This is how Jews and Muslims will be able to increase their chances of putting a stop to Anti-Semitism and Islamophobia.

IF

ACT-UP was an advocacy group that worked to impact the lives of people with AIDS. They raised awareness to give free access to antiviral drugs to those who were affected by AIDS. This group used direct action to pressure the government, the media, and pharmaceutical companies to respond to their needs. They used sacred space to their advantage to enlighten bystanders of the bigotry faced by homophobes, people with AIDS, and abortion policies. Sacred space can be interpreted as having a specific purpose which can be used for people to devote their time to worship or the Catholic Church. Another way to interpret a sacred space is a place that is respected by a particular individual or group of people or the White House. ACT-UP used St. Patrick’s Cathedral to protest the Church’s homophobic and AIDS policies. Many protesters laid on the aisles in the churches screaming that they won’t stop protesting and others chained themselves to the church benches. They believed that homosexuality was not a sin and condoms were necessary to prevent the spread of AIDS in an environment where millions were dying because of the disease. Furthermore, protesters also poured the ashes of their loved ones to the front of the White House lawn. Protesters believed that emptying the ashes would be a powerful message to show the government that their refusal to acknowledge the deceased wouldn’t succeed. They thought it was important to bring the funeral to the White House since the government neglected the hundreds of funerals that took place. The people in power such as the president could’ve taken action to prevent these ashes from pouring onto the White House lawn. Their public actions were powerful because they weren’t afraid to march in numbers and protest for their rights. They gained the assistance from other social groups who were being ignored and otherized in society, and together they were able to unite and become a stronger coalition. They tried to gain as much media attention by strategically choosing to protest before presidential elections. They tried to gain a sense of empathy from the public to vote strategically for the president that would recognize the public’s opinion. They had no other option besides protesting to make public officials be on their side. In a time when everyone was silent, ACT-UP rose up to create a powerful voice to make a difference and save the lives of those who were on the verge of death due to the AIDS disease.

Activism around Islamophobia and Anti-Semitism can learn to unite groups of people and to raise awareness of the issue. The public has a fear of Muslims and the only way to overcome that is for Muslims to portray themselves in a positive light. They should protest non violently to express their own disapproval of the hate crimes and bigotry. The group of people who rise up even though they are being silenced will leave an impact on the people whose views are shaped by the media. Moreover, they must convince viewers that ignoring their viewpoint will have negative consequences for future generations. Muslims and Jews need to invite more people who are being otherized to their side to protest against the similar hate crimes and backlash that they face. Similarly, they must be persistent in achieving their goal because there will be many obstacles that will prevent them from reaching the goal.  Using the White House as ACT-UP did will be an effective method to change the opinion of government officials who have a strong impact on the opinions of everyday Americans. Although most of the media portrays Muslims and Jews in a negative light there needs to be more positive interactions to decrease the apprehension that is felt by the public.

-A.B