YDSA COVID Organizing, 2022

Taylor Clark, interviewed by Jenna Norwood

The interviewer met with YDSA co-chair Taylor Clark to discuss the demonstration concerning the influx of COVID money received by UCSB. Clark details his involvement in YDSA, as well as how the chapter found out about the money, steps they took to contact the administration, and how they planned the march to chancellor Yang’s house to demand answers. 

Just to explain a little background about what I’m researching for my project. So last year, UCSB received an influx of COVID money from the government in 2020. I believe it was around twenty-two million dollars and the funds seem to be unaccounted for and the university was just not being transparent about where the money was going, what it was doing, and it led to a lot of confusion and then anger among the students. So today I’m here interviewing Taylor Clark, a member of YDSA just to ask him a few questions about the march that was led to demand checks for the students from the COVID relief funds. So can you just tell me a little bit about your involvement In YDSA and the position you hold, and just a little bit of how you got to be so active in this organization? 

So I am YDSA’s co-chair that essentially makes me- It’s similar to a co-president situation, but well, we kind of think of it as like a facilitator in chief. So my role is really to facilitate the priorities we decide on as a chapter. And to the best of my ability to make sure those things are effectively carried out, whatever they may be, at least in theory. Well, what was the rest of your question? 

Just like your involvement and how you got to be so active, like how you got introduced to it?

Yeah. So our chapter of YDSA got started from the UCSB chapter of Students for Bernie in the 2020 presidential campaign after the election. We essentially want to continue organizing and looking for ways to do that, and we felt that the young Democratic Socialists of America best suited our chapters, values and the sort of political project we are pursuing. So in the wake of Bernie’s loss in the election, we essentially voted to transition and become a YDSA chapter. When I was at the time, I was one of the people who was really pushing us to become a YDSA chapter because I didn’t want to, you know, throw in the towel after the campaign. But yeah, I suppose that’s kind of the abridged version of how I got involved in YDSA, after I was what’s called a campus core leader in the Bernie campaign, which is essentially someone who got some training from the campaign itself to then go and organize students, And then after serving as a campus core leader, I ran for co-chair and We wrote a constitution for ourselves as a YDSA chapter, and I got elected as I got like two, two and a half years ago. Something like that weirdly enough. And yeah, just been organizing with YDSA ever since.

Yeah, that’s super great! So I know the way that YDSA is organized is that they bring up a certain topic that people want to discuss, so regarding the COVID money, how did the YDSA chapter find out about the money given to UCSB? And what were the initial steps into digging deeper on what the money was going to be used for or what you guys thought would be the right way for UCSB to use the money? 

Yeah, for sure. So from my memory, it was one of our chapter members at the time whose name is Patrick, Patrick Fairbanks. He essentially, I forgot exactly what sort of turned him onto it, how we found out about it. But some way or another, he sort of discovered that the university had received a lot of money from the federal government in the CARES package, and that for whatever reason, a lot of this money wasn’t being spent. And at first, our approach really was to just figure out what was going on there and why it looked, from our perspective, why the university was just sitting on over $10 million in COVID relief funds? So yeah, yeah, I still have no idea what ended up happening to that money, funny enough. 

Really? That’s Interesting!

Yeah, It’s an interesting follow-up project, like research projects on what exactly it all got spent on, but we haven’t had at the time to do it. Anyway, so yeah, one of our chapter members, Patrick Fairbanks, who later became the chapter secretary for some time, essentially kind of discovered that a lot of the money the university got from the COVID relief fund had not been spent, and we initially started trying to have a conversation with the university. I believe we talked to a few vice-chancellors and other university representatives to essentially just figure out where the money was supposed to go. And the university’s response, in so many words, was essentially that they felt that they needed to save the money because they were running a deficit and, you know, the kind of tagline the catchphrase that, that administration uses whenever they have to justify this sort of thing is, oh, budget cuts. We’re not getting as much money as we used to from the state, etc. So when we brought it up to the vice-chancellor, she essentially said the reason the money hasn’t been spent is because we need to use that money to cover the University’s deficits related to COVID. The ironic thing is that, like she cited budget deficits and decreased state funding as the reason for me to retain the money, but that year, the university had actually received significantly more money from the state than had in previous years. I think to the tune of like sixty million dollars more. 

Oh wow. 

Yeah, a fairly significant sum. So the university actually receives a lot more money from the federal government from federal and state government than the vice-chancellor was essentially kind of implying and didn’t really make sense to say that they needed to hold on to all of that COVID relief money because they’re just this boost in funding from the state for that year.

Especially to say that, you know, that this money was given for COVID relief, but then they’re using it for a deficit, which is for two different purposes. So I could see how people would react with confusion and anger towards that. 

Yeah, absolutely. That’s when we discovered that that was really what the confusion started to turn anger for, I think understandable reasons. And so at that point, we started pivoting towards, well, thinking about the things that would be a lot more useful that that money could be used for. And kind of the immediate thing that came to mind, especially with the relief, like the stimulus checks that were going out at that time was just something that made the most sense. I think that was also something that Patrick initially came up with back in the day. And so we did some simple math and worked out that the amount of money that they were sitting on could be sent to students and about like nine hundred dollars even checks and would effectively use up a lot of the money, but leave a little bit leftover for, like important sanitation work, which the university said that they needed some of the money for, I believe. And from there, we went on to eventually organize a march around it, we talked and unanimously passed a resolution sort of endorsing the idea. And eventually, the university didn’t really give ground, and once summer hit, we kind of lost steam. It was very hard to sort of keep this energy after that. But yeah.

So do you remember anything, based on the research that I did, it seemed like there was a series of emails that were sent between members of YDSA and staff of UCSB. Like, if you don’t remember, it’s perfectly fine, but do you remember the tone of the emails? And if they seemed kind of receptive to the cause of anywhere or where they just kind of more like dismissive of what you guys were trying to do? 

So, yeah, first they were essentially, the first round of emails were essentially sympathetic and saying, “yeah, we understand these are hard times with university needs some money”, and then I personally was not really the person writing emails or sending them, well, I’m not even sure I read them all. It was mostly handled by our secretary at the time. But my understanding from what I remember is that at first university kind of expressed sympathy but then the problem didn’t go away. There was some frustration with that. 

Yeah, yeah. And then from there it seemed like you guys kind of started planning the march after you calculated the numbers. Do you remember the reaction from the staff to the march taking place? Were they dismissive again? Or were they kind of sympathetic to the march taking place? Also, did you have to ask permission? That was the question I wanted to ask. 

Oh no. YDSA historically does not really ask for permission to do these things.

I think, yeah, that’s what I figured.

Yeah, yeah. It’s kind of what my pride points for our chapter is. We just do what we feel like we need to do. Anyway, So I’m sure that, you know, the feelings of staff were not monolithic, and I’m sure some would probably be a lot more sympathetic to the idea than others. The only interaction we had with staff, during and after the march was the vice-chancellor, I think it was the vice-chancellor or someone from an administration, not the person previously. But some folks from administration essentially monitored the march and that was, it was explained to me that that was their substitute for having like a police presence, which is obviously preferable to have a few staff people there instead of police to protest. Yeah. Um, and I expect the folks we talked to then were pretty sympathetic, I don’t think they spoke for the university in any official capacity. I think they were just expressing personal sympathies. And we did try to schedule some follow-up meetings with the university after the march. Again, there were lots of emails that I don’t really remember, but my understanding was that we got kind of stonewalled and I think the university got essentially tired of meeting with us because but they essentially just wanted to say, “We’re holding on to this money for these deficit problems”, and they weren’t. You know, they want to make us happy, but they didn’t want to change their position on the issue. 

Yeah, exactly, yeah. And that’s obviously very frustrating from a student standpoint, knowing that there’s this large sum of money, especially in our position, knowing that we are students and that we need help more than ever, especially because of COVID. So I could see where the frustration would lie on the student side, but for the purpose of the transcription. If you could just go through like the day of the march from what you remember, like kind of the series of events, how people were feeling during the march, like how just the vibe, the overall vibe of the march, just for the purpose of the transcription so people can know what the day kind of felt like. 

 For sure. For sure. So. Marches always have a sort of anxiety leading up to them, at least for the people organizing them, because, you know, you always have this impression that no one’s going to show up. So I think that I remember most from the beginning of the day. It’s like this kind of nervous excitement. We had gotten sort of all the materials together, and I tend to be kind of an early bird. So I was the first person at the site like an hour early or something waiting for other folks to come back. And we started in front of the UCen, and, you know, at first, it’s kind of a trickle of people. We had some music going, and I think some signs and we also had a lot of paraphernalia that say, we had like flags and banners and all sorts of things, which was a lot of fun. Anyway, It’s kind of starts to trickle, a couple of people start coming kind of get set up and then once it’s like ten minutes past the time you say everyone’s supposed to be, that’s when folks actually get there. We got a group of, I think, 40 to 50 people together. And yeah, from there, it was kind of just a matter of you know, again, the chanting and stuff starts to happen. 

And you went to Chancellor Yang’s house correct? Yeah, yeah. Based on the research I did, it didn’t seem like he was home or anything like that.

 It did not seem like that. I’m actually curious where he was at the time.

Yeah, that’s a good question.

Yeah, I wonder if I see he was at like off-campus house or something

I’m sure he was somewhere, and then there was also a letter that he sent, correct? He sent out a letter saying, this is why the checks are not coming. Or maybe it wasn’t him specifically, but I remember getting something in my USCB email.

Oh, that’s interesting. I don’t remember that too concretely. Unfortunately, I think from what I remember, which may very well be wrong because it has been a little while. Yeah, but I think they alluded to it kind of in a larger email as well.

Yeah, yeah. I think that’s what I’m referring to. Yeah, yeah. I remember it was kind of a big deal like a lot of people were talking about it, even my friends who weren’t YDSA and I was kind of like telling them about what was happening and they were like, hh yeah, I heard about that. So I mean, it reached pretty far across campus, which is really cool. Yeah. So I guess we still don’t have a definitive answer about where the money went and maybe like, maybe I can even do a project and research that for the Living History Project, for the thing that I’m doing. But I just felt like this was a huge piece of student activism that absolutely needed to be documented. And I think the Living History Project, which is what I’m a part of, would be the perfect way just to document this to people can or future students or students now can go back and read it and kind of just like, see the university and how they handled the situation and then versus how the students handled the situation. So I just wanted to thank you so much for doing this interview. It was really helpful. And yeah, like I said earlier, once it’s already transcribed, posted to the website and whatnot, I will send you the link and then everyone In YDSA can read it as well. Yeah, thank you so much. 

Cool. All right. Wow. Sounds good. 

Yeah, thank you again for doing this, I really appreciate it.

Sure. Have a good night!

Thank you. You too!


Interviewed by: Jenna Norwood

International Peace Week at UCSB, 1972

By Jillian Wertzberger

The week of April 17th to April 22nd, 1972, students across the nation held demonstrations in protest of the war in Vietnam during “International Peace Week.” These demonstrations culminated in the “March for Peace,” sponsored by the Peace Action Coalition. The UCSB branch of the Student Mobilization Committee to End the War in Vietnam (SMC), employed various methods of communication, organization, and preparation to coordinate protests of civil disobedience on campus and in neighboring Isla Vista to express their disapproval of the Vietnam War. 

In the early 70s, UCSB’s reputation had changed from that of a party school to a center of liberal dissent following the 1970 Isla Vista riots. A study conducted in 1971 showed that UCSB students believed that it was their right to take aggressive “militant” action against authority in order to meet their demands. Students were becoming more politically involved as Nixon implemented his plan of Vietnamization, while ramping up bombing campaigns in North Vietnam. It was against this setting that the Student Mobilization Committee to End the War in Vietnam sponsored anti-war activities leading up to two mass demonstrations in New York City and Los Angeles on April 22, 1972. Planned at a Cleveland Peace Action Coalition conference in December 1971, the March for Peace was the last major protest in response to the War in Vietnam.

International Peace Week

Tuesday, April 11

The Student Mobilization Committee showed the movie Winter Soldier in association with Vietnam Veterans Against the War. The express purpose of which was to build support for the Los Angeles march on April 22. This was a smart tactic to create pathos for the suffering of soldiers in Vietnam with the film, then directly after use the students’ outrage to fuel interest in the protest. Unlike many protest groups, the SMC strongly defended soldiers who did not support the war, working with them to distribute anti-war propaganda, and even publicizing cases of harassment of soldiers. Furthermore, the SMC was clearly planning weeks ahead for the LA march and demonstrated a remarkable level of organization in cooperating with the Vietnam Veterans. 

Friday, April 14

Rhonda Ohme wrote a letter to the editor of the Daily Nexus, entitled “Don’t forget the war.” This letter intended to guilt students by comparing their sunny, party climate to the 300 “Indochinese” civilians killed by bombing campaigns every day. This letter told students to act on their beliefs and take responsibility in the anti-war movement by attending the upcoming anti-war march in Los Angeles.

Sunday, April 16

It is worth noting that the day before anti-war week began, Operation Freedom Porch, a bombing campaign over Haiphong, also began in earnest. Its goal was to strike a petroleum storage center in the area. Additionally, at 8 p.m. 35 students from Santa Barbara high schools, Santa Barbara City College, and UCSB met at the Isla Vista Legal Collective. These students endorsed immediate local action against the war in Vietnam and of the L.A. march, which demonstrates exceptional communicative and cooperative skills.

Monday, April 17

The Daily Nexus published an article titled “Antiwar week begins today” by Christy Wise. The article details many different strategies and activities that the SMC employed in order to generate interest in the march in L.A. On Monday, the SMC held a rally in Perfect Park which attracted over 300 people. However, from the number of protestors at Perfect Park compared to the number of students at UCSB in 1972 (12,400), one can infer that the dedicated antiwar protestors did not represent the whole of the student body. Additionally, other dedicated UCSB students used “guerilla theater” tactics when they, in collaboration with KCSB, played tapes of bombing campaigns and distributed flyers that read “If this was a bomb, you’d be dead.” Later that day, 200 students met in the University Center (UCen) lobby and discussed different antiwar measures, from sending postcards to the White House to sending guns to the North Vietnamese. These events all illustrate a frustrated and impassioned, if small, population that actively demonstrated against the war in Vietnam.  

Tuesday, April 18

Bob Tedone of the Nexus reported on protests occuring at other campuses such as Stanford and Berkeley where he described the overall atmosphere as “apathetic” despite numerous protests. At UCSB, 200-300 students marched from the back of the University Center to the Administration Building and demanded that Vice Chancellor Stephen Goodspeed put an end to ROTC recruitment and war research on campus. Goodspeed reaffirmed the right of recruiters to be on campus. 200-300 students is notably a similar number of students compared to the attendees of the Perfect Park rally, and reinforces the notion that the dedicated anti war protesters were a small and dedicated group. This number was considered a poor showing and one of the speakers, Becca Wilson, commented that an aura of defeatism had permeated UCSB. Later that day, the SMC also showed Air War and Chemical War, two anti war films that show real combat footage, clearly trying to garner sympathy for Vietnamese civilians abroad and discourage apathy at home.  All of these protests were efforts to encourage political participation in the L.A. march. 

Wednesday April 19

A guest editorial in the Daily Nexus entitled “Campuses oppose warmaking” called for an immediate national student strike in protest of Nixon’s escalation of the war. 13 schools in total, including three UC’s and several ivy league schools, united in protest and decided to strike on Friday. The Nexus also released a special anti war edition, featuring guest editorials and cartoons. One editorial entitled “We must act!” encouraged students to attend Saturday’s March for Peace in L.A. The editorial urged students to take responsibility for the actions of the U.S. government, writing that each citizen is responsible for every dead civilian in Vietnam if he does not protest. 

Also on Wednesday was a broadly appealing, if fairly disorganized rally protesting many things, from cuts to the minority students’ associations, to ROTC and the war in general. For example, speakers from the Legal Council tried to raise funds for minority associations right before the Young Socialist Alliance tried to raise support for a student strike. Chancellor Don Cheadle answered questions at the rally, reaffirming Vice Chancellor Goodspeed’s position that recruiters had a right to be on campus. However, he additionally reported that he had sent a telegram to President Nixon calling for a withdrawal from Vietnam and an end to bombing campaigns. After the rally, a group of about 50 students conducted a peaceful sit-in at the ROTC center in the face of six campus policemen. At Santa Barbara high schools, UCSB students distributed leaflets that promoted the march. Also promoting the march was Becca Wilson who gave a lecture titled “Electronic Battlefield” at the University Center, where the SMC was selling tickets for rides to L.A. Students present at the UCen unanimously voted to hold a candlelight vigil at Perfect Park the following day. More than anything, Wednesday demonstrates the wide variety of approaches to raising awareness and gathering support for anti-war causes. 

Thursday, April 20

The Daily Nexus reported about campus student strikes and demonstrations across the country. Isla Vista held its own candlelight vigil in Perfect Park which had been organized the day before and advertised in the Nexus the day of, which demonstrates a strong ability to coordinate events on behalf of politically active students. Additionally, the SMC held a monitor training session in the UCen in order to ensure that the protests in Isla Vista and in L.A. would remain peaceful. This demonstrates an impressive level of preparation and forethought by the SMC. The SMC continued to advertise its organized transportation services in a letter to the editor of the Nexus, which ensured students that marching is a valuable protest tactic before reporting that tickets to the L.A. march would be on sale at the UCen for $1.50. In support of the SMC, Humboldt Hall in San Miguel Dorm stated in a letter to the editor that it had allocated half of its funds to purchase tickets to the L.A. march for residents of Humboldt Hall and other students unable to afford tickets. Additionally, the Nexus published an editorial in support of the student strike, encouraging students to meet behind the UCen at noon and to travel to Vandenberg Air Force Base. Explicitly, this writer wanted to contrast the peaceful protest with violence and weapons of war at the Base, and admonished students who did not protest as unempathetic. Clearly, the support and advertisement of the march ramped up as the week drew nearer to Saturday.

Friday, April 21

At the University Center, the SMC continued to sell tickets to the march. The Nexus also relayed when and where to meet for students who had purchased tickets on the front page. Three different editorials urged students to attend the March for Peace, often angrily railing against the apparent apathy of the student body. However, one editorial by a third year student titled “Disruption” admonishes protestors who disrupted a History 177 lecture in Campbell Hall by chanting slogans and encouraging students to leave class before finally departing, unsuccessful. The student declared while he was opposed to the war, he saw little use in this manner of protest. Clearly, attitudes were mixed at UCSB. While there was a general anti-war sentiment, there were varying degrees of expression of support to the cause. A dedicated group of students organized a banner-making session in the UCen lobby at 10 a.m. before a march at the Vandenberg Air Force Base. 200 peaceful demonstrators marched at the base carrying banners and singing patriotic songs. However, only about 40 of these were UCSB students because the base was 60 miles away. Those who could drive drove as many as they could and handed out flyers for the March for Peace to school buses and military personnel. The Vandenberg march had only been planned the previous day and thus shows a high degree of spontaneity among dedicated students. Finally on Friday, 200 devoted students (again a similar number to that at Perfect Park) went on strike in protest of the war. 

Saturday, April 22

Christy Wise reported on the Los Angeles march in “L.A. hosts 12,000 for Saturday march,” reported in Monday’s edition of the Daily Nexus. Students at UCSB had hoped to draw crowds in the hundreds of thousands, while many naysayers said they would have been lucky to draw 20,000. The rally lasted for six hours and included speakers such as Dr. Ralph Abernathy from the SCLC and Anthony Russo, a defendant in the “Pentagon Papers” trial. Despite this poor showing, speakers celebrated UCSB because of the march on the Vandenberg Base the day before. Nationally, the March for Peace had sister marches in metropolitan areas such as New York City and Boston. Internationally, France also held its own march on April 22.

Response

Dan Hentschke wrote “New tactics necessary for action, change” which admonished UCSB students for their lack of political participation. Hentschke wrote that Isla Vista and Santa Barbara were infected with apathy and passivity. He believed that UCSB students’ participation in the L.A. march was “scant” and that the overall turnout was disappointing. Furthermore, he berated the general community that rolled its eyes at protestors who believed marches make change. Hentschke wrote that new “direct action” tactics are necessary in order to incite change. Earlier that week, one student wrote an editorial declaring that “March does no good,” saying that the government does not respond to civil disobedience or the actions of individuals. From these editorials, one can interpret that some students following the intense turmoil of the 1970 riots became even more politically active. Others, however, may have grown tired of the constant negativity in the news and believed that civil disobedience was not able to produce change. Nationally, a study collecting data on march attendees cataloged a noticeable decline in march attendance in the year range 1970-1973, which also supports the idea that the American public may have started to believe that marching and civil disobedience does not bring about change.


Works Cited

National Peace Action Coalition, Sponsor/Advertiser. March for peace, April 22. California United States, 1972. Photograph. Library of Congress, Yanker Poster Collection. https://www.loc.gov/item/2016648574/

Student Mobilization Committee, “Film Winter Soldier,” 1972. Student Organizations Collection, [Box 4, Folder 34], Special Research Collections, UCSB Library.

Daily Nexus

1972 April 17: Christy Wise, “Antiwar week begins today,” 2. 

1972 April 14: Rhonda Ohme, “Don’t forget the war,” 5. 

1972 April 18: Bob Tedone, “War escalation meets protest,” 1. 

1972 April 18: Charles Brown, “The birds of war take to the skies,” 4. 

1972 April 19: Bob Tedone, “Bombs bring UCSB campus protest,” 1. 

1972 April 19: Christy Wise, “Students protest new bombing by anti-war actions,” 1. 

1972 April 19: Okamura, 10. 

1972 April 19: “Campuses oppose warmaking,” 4. 

1972 April 19: “We must act!” 9. 

1972 April 20: Mike Gordon, “Cheadle faces protesters at minority rally,” 1. 

1972 April 20: Howard Graham, “March does no good,” 4. 

1972 April 20: “Dorms aid march,” 4. 

1972 April 21: Christy Wise, “War and people march on,” 1.

1972 April 21: “What do to? Act!” 4. 

1972 April 21: Tom Moylan, “See you in Los Angeles,” 4.

1972 April 24: Vandenberg sees peaceful protest,” 1. 

1972 April 21: Mark Frei, “Disruption,” 5. 

1972 April 24: Christy Wise, “L.A. hosts 12,000 for Saturday march,” 1. 

1972 April 26: Dan Hentschke, “New tactics necessary for action, change,” 2. 

1972 April 20: “L.A. Antiwar March OKd by Coalition.” Los Angeles Times, 1-d9.  

https://search.proquest.com/docview/157040271?accountid=14522.

1969 June 5: Ron Wolin, “Student Mobilization,” The New York Review, n.p.  

Marine Corps. (May 1, 1972). Command Chronology for the period 1 through 30 April 1972.  Retrieved December 2, 2019 from https://catalog.archives.gov/OpaAPI/media/2442506/content/usmc/083/00005951.pdf?download=true  

John & Yoko at National Peace Action Coalition antiwar rally, Bryant Park, NYC April 22 1972,” Youtube video, posted by Peter Feld, April 22, 2012, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-G8HHj3DK8 

“SYND 22/04/72 ANTI-VIETNAM WAR DEMONSTRATIONS IN BOSTON,” Youtube video, posted by Associated Press, July 23, 2015, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QqovCh0wFU

Smith, Robert, “The Vietnam War and Student Militancy,” Social Science Quarterly 52:1 (June, 1971) pp. 133-156. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/42860063.pdf

Seidler, John, Katherine Meyer, and Lois Mac Gillivray. “Collecting Data on Crowds and Rallies: A New Method of Stationary Sampling.” Social Forces 55, no. 2 (1976): 507-19. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2576239?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents

Skip to content