Advertisement

So you want a revolution?

"I do know of subversion abroad in our land...It is subversive for commissions like these to spread such hysteria and intimidation throughout the land that Americans are afraid to sign petitions, afraid to read progressive magazines, afraid to make out checks for liberal causes, afraid to join organizations, afraid to speak their minds on public issues . . . this is the destruction of democracy."

Yet, today, Luscomb does not reveal the passionate depth of her convictions all at once. She talks slowly, with the measured rhythm and varied tone of the practiced public speaker but she never talks at you. Indeed, you might be deceived, on first meeting her, into imagining that this charming old lady was taking it easy after adventures such as her 1962 trip to the World Disarmament Congress in Moscow. But the deception is short-lived. She says her time is more her own now but she still gives lectures about the history of the women's movement, her journeys to China, Cuba, and Russia, and her ongoing work for civil rights and world peace.

Luscomb's phone rings continuously. One minute it is a radio network asking her to give a broadcast. A few moments later WGBH-TV calls to finalize an interview schedule. And of course her friends call, too. For, though she has remarked of her reforming campaigns that "They are the only things that made my life interesting, that made me feel that I was a part of my times...," it is nevertheless apparent that it is people, rather than abstract political ideologies that she cares about.

She likes to sit in a large, sunny living room filled with old furniture as comfortable and shabby as an old sweater. There are hanging plants, a piano with a West Virginia wall-hanging above it and a big, dark-stained dining table where the 11 inhabitants eat the common supper they take turns cooking. A brown-and-white cat watched us steadily from the sill of a bay window. "It adopted us," Luscomb says, watching the cat swish its tail and survey a spider crawling on the outside of the glass.

Then, abruptly, Luscomb's mood changes from the lazy sunny afternoon easiness to an earnest, groping-for-the-right-phrases intensity.

Advertisement

"You asked whether I think that young people take themselves so seriously now that they forget to take others seriously? Well...you can't take yourself too seriously, there's always a small proportion of the public that takes interest in public problems. They're the ones who're right and they act on their convictions, live their ideals. But one of the truly great tragedies of the lives of most of us is that our existence is a high-walled lane, down which we travel with people of our own kind--of the same education, economic status, national background, religious classification--while beyond the walls on left and right lie all humanity, unknown, unseen, untouched by our restricted, impoverished lives."

Luscomb believes that everybody has the same responsibility for the welfare of human society and that, even as women campaign for absolute equality, they must fight with equal vigor against discrimination of any kind, racial or national. This kind of "all the human race are one" outlook on life seems as overly optimistic and simplistic as a Sunday-school teacher convinced of the essential benevolence of man despite the evidence to the contrary vocally presented by her obstreperous charges. And yet Luscomb's idealism is linked to unshakeable political beliefs. One might find fault with her world political analysis (Russia: "They made great forward steps in the beginning towards the socialist order, but then they slowed down and now they've developed a privileged class and stopped progress." China: "It seems to me that they are still going forward, not having yet developed a managerial class." The world: "We are in the midst of a tremendous change in the fundamental organization of our society and people must keep a historical perspective--miracles can't occur in just 25 years"). And you would be forgiven for feeling that Luscomb too neatly avoids the question of the denial of the right to dissent in the nations like China, North Korea, Cambodia that she feels are "leading the way." In fact, it seems more convenient than intellectually honest to answer a question on civil rights in China that, "Anyone who disagrees is not punished but re-educated...In any case, consider the former condition of the great Chinese mass and compare that with today." In short, Luscomb in many ways reminds one of early American socialist leaders such as Eugene Debs (whom she voted for in 1920, the year she was first eligible to vote). In many ways she personifies both the morality and the organizational weakness that beset those early, turn-of-the-century American socialists advocating a theory of nonviolent parliamentary socialism. And today, while one may marvel at the perennial hope of the women it is harder to share her optimism. This is not to say that Luscomb is insincere. It is simply that her vision of the future trusts perhaps too much in the natural cooperativeness of free men to convince the average, cynical city-dweller.

Luscomb's faith in human nature is, ultimately, refreshing but she also seems to have left something out of the reckoning. She tells, for example, the story of how one of the men in her household was at Seabrook and she speaks of the demonstration as an inspiration to all activist groups. And she may be right. Her prognosis, and hope, that we may all be moving inevitably to communist society may also turn out to be correct. But in the meantime, for the doubting Thomas's, there are still nagging questions such as "What part did oil companies have in the fomenting of protest against nuclear power?" or "How much like George Orwell's Animal Farm will the 'ideal' state be?" In the end it may just be best not to delve too deeply into Luscomb's beliefs and decide whether we agree lest we fall victim to the same riduculing or harassing frame of mind as those 1920's reactionaries who sought to restrain the needed reforms of society, economics and politics that Luscomb and her ilk fought for, even when they didn't always see their dreams fulfilled in their lifetime. It is, after all, so easy to mock but so much harder to do. And Luscomb has spent a lifetime demanding "what is to be done?"

Even more notably, Luscomb has gone ahead and acted upon her beliefs, from fighting racial prejudice to outwitting the State Department in order to visit the People's Republic of China she so admires. Many people write, argue or theorize. Florence Luscomb has acted instead. And actions always have spoken louder than words

Advertisement