MIM Notes ***

MIM Notes 271 · December 1, 2002· Page 1

MIM Notes

December 1, 2002, Nº 271

The Official Newsletter of the Maoist Internationalist Movement (MIM)

Free

INSIDE: * Election analysis * Under Lock & Key * Una Página en Español...

MIM
PO Box 29670
Los Angeles, CA 90029
Return Service Requested

PRESORTED STANDARD

U.S. POSTAGE PAID

PERMIT #589

WORCESTER, MA

On the web: www.prisoncensorship.info/archive/etext

You are not on a mailing list. You will not receive this paper again unless you take action.

IM handed out 500 copies of

MIM Notes at the November

3rd rally on Boston Common

opposed to war with Iraq. There were not

nearly enough for the thousands of

demonstrators with Boston Police

estimating 15,000.(1)

Various peace organizations including

the Quaker American Friends Service

Committee succeeded in drawing out a

real cross-section of suburbia to the rally.

This was not a rally of young students,

but instead a huge section of middle-aged

and elderly people showed up.

One of the shirts worn by the rally

participants read: "Baseball is life. The

rest is just details." That pretty much

makes it official that at least a small

section of middle Amerika opposes the

war.

A sign from an anarchist contingent

read: "Anarchists are black; commies are

red. Fuck this war, class war instead."

Another sign read, "thank you France and

Germany," in reference to French

opposition to the U.$. position in the

United Nations and the German

campaign, which among other things saw

discussion comparing Bush and Hitler.

There were many demonstrators

For more anti-war coverage,
see "Polls on war with Iraq"
and "MIM conducts poll of it
own" on pages 4 and 5.

Boston rallies against war on Iraq

Protest around the world

Rallies against the U$ war on Iraq in the last month took place in (clockwise from top right): Washington,

DC; Ankara, Turkey; New Delhi, India; Madrid, Spain; Brussels, Belgium; and Johannesburg, South Africa.

Continued on page 4...

One clear indication that the war-

mongers start on top even in

Massachusetts is that incumbent Senator

John Kerry (D-MA) felt free to vote for

the war despite the organizing of tens of

thousands of his constituents. His website

kerry.senate.gov does not even mention

the word "Iraq" except in one document

where he mentions it only to ask for a bi-

partisan approach on Iraq and other

subjects. Kerry won re-election in a

landslide: 81% to 19% for his Libertarian

opponent.

On his campaign website, Kerry seems

to have forgotten that he posted the

following analysis from the Boston

Globe: "On the other hand, Kerry still

faces a vote in the Senate authorizing

military force.

If he votes for

it--and at this

point many

D e m o c r a t s

indicate they

will--all his

e a r l i e r

The white van baloney

Sniper shows Amerikkka itself

CNN repeatedly showed active police chases of white vans in the Rockville,

Maryland area in October. In one lengthy television interlude just prior to the

capture of the suspects, helicopter cameras focused on a "suspicious" white

van pulled over by police in one gully. Yet as we all know, it turns out there

was no white van and no white box truck involved in the arrest of the two

suspects owning a blue 1990 Chevrolet Caprice. It appears it was all settler

hysteria imagining white vehicles--and MIM would say the same process is

at work not just in finding suspects but in convicting them.

The Maryland area sniper who shot 13 people was a justification for not

covering everything from Iraq war debate to the Chechen hostage drama in

Moscow's theater. CNN had found its equivalent of fresh pornography--a

sniper. Anyone watching TV risked permanent brain-damage as the media

boxed out for George W. Bush, who badly needed as many distractions as

possible. People surfing the Internet did much better with the variety of topics

and depth of detail they found.

A case involving a man falsely convicted of rape and who died of a heart

attack in the process of clearing his name caused the New York Times in

1995 to publish a summary of the academic evidence regarding eyewitnesses

Sen. Kerry's vote proves that

the war-mongers are on top

Continued on page 9...

Continued on

page 6...

MIM Notes 271 · December 1, 2002· Page 2

MIM Notes

The Official Newsletter of The Maoist Internationalist Movement

ISSN 1540-8817

MIM Notes is the bi-weekly newsletter of the Maoist Internationalist Movement. MIM

grants explicit permission to copy all or part of this newspaper for any reason. Please
credit MIM Notes where appropriate. The paper is free to all prisoners. Overseas airmail
is $2 per issue. MIM Notes is the official Party voice. Material in the paper is the Party's
position unless noted to the contrary. MIM Notes accepts submissions and critiques from
anyone. The editors reserve the right to edit copy unless permission is specifically denied
by the author. Back issues of MIM Notes are available for $1 per issue. A bound volume
of the original MIM Notes 1-34 and MIM Theory 1-13 (old numbering) is available for
$15, post-paid. MIM has a complete literature list of progressive books and pamphlets.
Send $2 for a copy. MIM's ten point program is available to anyone who sends in a
SASE. MIM is an underground party that does not publish the names of its comrades in
order to avoid the state surveillance and repression that have historically been directed at
communist parties and anti-imperialist movements. MCs, MIM comrades, are members
of the Party. RCs are RAIL Comrades. The Revolutionary Anti-Imperialist League (RAIL)
is an anti-imperialist mass organization led by MIM. MIM runs a books for prisoners
program which provides Maoist and general political material to prisoners for free. Make
checks or money orders payable to "Books for Prisoners, Inc." Federal EIN: 04-3475938.
Send to: Books for Prisoners, Inc. c/o the address below. Donations and books can be
sent to the address below. Send cash or check payable to "MIM Distributors".

MIM

P.O. Box 29670

Los Angeles, CA 90029-0670

eMail: <mim@mim.org>

WWW: <http//www.prisoncensorship.info/archive/etext>

What is MIM?

The Maoist Internationalist Movement (MIM) is the collection of existing or emerging

Maoist internationalist parties in the English-speaking imperialist countries and their English-

speaking internal semi-colonies, as well as the existing or emerging Maoist Internationalist
parties in Belgium, France and Quebec and the existing or emerging Spanish-speaking
Maoist Internationalist parties of Aztlan, Puerto Rico and other territories of the U.$. Empire.

MIM Notes is the newspaper of MIM. Notas Rojas is the newspaper of the Spanish-speaking
parties or emerging parties of MIM. MIM upholds the revolutionary communist ideology
of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and is an internationalist organization that works from the

vantage point of the Third World proletariat. MIM struggles to end the oppression of all
groups over other groups: classes, genders, nations. MIM knows this is only possibly by
building public opinion to seize power through armed struggle. Revolution is a reality for

North America as the military becomes over-extended in the government's attempts to
maintain world hegemony. MIM differs from other communist parties on three main
questions: (1) MIM holds that after the proletariat seizes power in socialist revolution, the

potential exists for capitalist restoration under the leadership of a new bourgeoisie within
the communist party itself. In the case of the USSR, the bourgeoisie seized power after the
death of Stalin in 1953; in China, it was after Mao's death and the overthrow of the "Gang

of Four" in 1976. (2) MIM upholds the Chinese Cultural Revolution as the farthest advance
of communism in humyn history. (3) As Marx, Engels and Lenin formulated and MIM has
reiterated through materialist analysis, imperialism extracts super-profits from the Third

World and in part uses this wealth to buy off whole populations of oppressor nation so-
called workers. These so-called workers bought off by imperialism form a new petty-
bourgeoisie called the labor aristocracy. These classes are not the principal vehicles to

advance Maoism within those countries because their standards of living depend on
imperialism. At this time, imperialist super-profits create this situation in the Canada, Quebec,
the United $tates, England, France, Belgium, Germany, Japan, Italy, Switzerland,

Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Israel, Sweden and Denmark. MIM accepts people as
members who agree on these basic principles and accept democratic centralism, the system
of majority rule, on other questions of party line.

"The theory of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin is universally applicable. We should

regard it not as dogma, but as a guide to action. Studying it is not merely a matter of

learning terms and phrases, but of learning Marxism-Leninism as the science of revolution."

- Mao Zedong, Selected Works, Vol. II, p. 208.

Editor, MC206; Production, MC12

MIM is looking for distributors and

sponsors to step forward. Sponsors pay for
papers; distributors get them onto the
streets and officers do both distribution and
financial support:

Distribute

Cost per year

12 (Priority Mail)

$120

25 (Priority Mail)

$150

50 (Priority Mail)

$280

100

$380

200

$750

900 (Express Mail!)

$3,840

900 (8-10 days)

$2,200

If you know you have some good places

distribute, we suggest starting at 200 and
working your way up. If you are not willing
to distribute, just send money. If you are
not willing to pay, then request papers after
somehow proving to the party that you are
serious (words won't count). You who will
cough up/raise the money to distribute 900
papers each issue and then do the
distribution -- you are what drives this party
forward.

Make anonymous money orders payable

to "MIM." Send to MIM, attn: Camb.
branch, PO Box 400559, Cambridge, MA
02140. Or write mim3@mim.org.

A call for MIM Notes sponsors and distributors!

Interview with

Prof. Jose Maria Sison

24 October 2002

Audio interview with Jose Maria Sison now available!

Prof. Sison upon his release from prison after the fall of dictator Ferdinand Marcos.

A MIM Notes correspondent interviewed Prof. Sison at
length by telephone on 24 October 2002. Prof. Sison
expands on some of the points discussed in the print
interview and discusses some new topics. The interview is
available on-line at http://www.prisoncensorship.info/archive/etext/
countries/phil/index.html and http://www.etext.org/Politics/
MIM/agitation/philippines.html; we are also selling audio
CDs of the interview.

Here is a track list:

1. Why the United $tates slandered Prof. Sison as

a "terrorist".

2. Terrorism defined. 3. U.$. hypocriscy in the

"war on terrorism". 4. The (un)official sanc-
tions on Prof. Sison.

5. "A climate of fear." Intimidation of the NDFP

negotiating panel.

6. Current status of the NDFP/GRP peace negotia-

tions. 7. Principles of protracted people's war.
8. Bush's drive for war on Iraq.

9. The United $tates and feudal exploitation in the

Philippines.

10. What can be done to support Prof. Sison.

To order send $10 to JMS CD c/o MIM, PO

Box 29670, Los Angeles CA, 90029-0670. Make

checks/MOs out to "MIM Distributors."

MIM Notes 271 · December 1, 2002· Page 3

MIM Notes has seen a big spike in

circulation since the "war on
terrorism" began. It's not surprising:
MIM Notes is a free and independent

newspaper. Yes, there are especially
now knee-jerk patriots who believe
everything Bush says and pass by a

chance to read MIM Notes. There are
other patriots and internationalists
who realize that at this time papers

like MIM Notes can undo the huge
spectacle that Uncle Sam is creating
for its own benefit.

Sure, you have seen MIM Notes

around, but MIM Notes needs people
to do two simple things: 1) Pay for it

(postage and printing), 2) Distribute
it!

MIM is looking for sponsors,

distributors and officers. Sponsors pay
for papers; distributors get them onto
the streets and officers do both

distribution and financial support.

Distribute # Cost per year

12 (Priority Mail)

$120

25 (Priority Mail)

$150

50 (Priority Mail)

$280

100

$380

200

$750

900 (Express Mail!)

$3,840

900 (8-10 days)

$2,200

If you know you have some good

places to do distribution, we suggest
starting at 200 and working your way
up higher. If you are not willing to do

distribution, just send money. If you
are not willing to pay, then request
papers after somehow proving to the

party that you are serious (words
won't count). You who will cough up/
raise the money to distribute 900

papers each issue and then do the
distribution, you are what drives this
party forward.

A call for MIM Notes

sponsors and distributors!

Make anonymous money orders payable to "MIM." Send to MIM,

attn: Camb. branch, PO Box 400559, Cambridge, MA 02140. Contact

MIM in regards to this campaign by writing mim3@mim.org

October 31 through November 5 tens

of thousands of people in downtown San

Francisco came face to face with the stark

reality of life inside the Security Housing

Units (SHU) in California prisons. On the

busy corner of Market and Powell streets

activists erected a mock SHU in a five

day vigil to expose the brutality of these

torture units. The activists collected

signatures on a petition calling for the

closure of the SHUs. At final count the

protest gathered 1328 signatures. The

fight has not ended and people interested

in participating can download a petition

at http://www.prisoncensorship.info/archive/etext/

prisons and continue collecting

signatures.

Organized by the All People's

Coalition Against the U.S. Occupation

and Terror, the SHU protest included a

hunger strike inside the SHU with a

different persyn every 24 hours, and

activists on the outside talking to passers

by. MIM was an active participant in this

event, sending an activist to take up a

post outside of the SHU for several hours

each day of the protest, along with a flyer

in the California SHU and the history of

these control units across the country. (A

At least by 1994, the U.S. Government

concluded that northern Korea probably

does have nuclear weapons. Political

scientist and arms control expert Dr.

Randall Forsberg has pointed out in her

campaign that the united $tates does not

attack Korea, because Kim has nuclear

weapons.(1) (Forsberg ran for the U.$.

Senate on an anti-war platform as a write-

in Democratic candidate.)

Right now, the Bush administration

would like to take a chance with a lot of

lives and guess that Iraq does not have

nuclear weapons. This has allowed

Saddam Hussein to come to a conclusion

about Korea too: "Asked why the United

States is not targeting North Korea,

which has acknowledged it was

developing nuclear weapons, Saddam

said `first because North Korea has no

oil and, second, because North Korea is

not an enemy to Israel, nor is it near its

borders.'"(2) By the way, the Associated

Press and Washington Post just quoted

are so "objective" that they quote

Saddam Hussein by naming him by first-

name; yet it does not quote George Bush

saying, "George said. . . "

Notes:
1. See for example, www.ForsbergforSenate.org
2. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/
articles/A62167-2002Nov3.html.

France has given in on a major

stumbling block in inter-imperialist

relations. Economic relations of the states

called the "European Union" have one

huge and ugly fact that does not fit with

the rhetoric about "free trade" and

elimination of European borders for

economic exchange--French subsidies to

agriculture.

Starting in 2004, the European Union

is going to give ever larger shares of its

money to subsidize agriculture in the poor

states newly entering the European Union

in eastern Europe. France has recognized

this fact and come to accept that subsidies

to its farmers will decline if not in

absolute amount then in real terms from

2007 onwards.

This agreement reached between

Germany and France immediately cast a

different light on England's relationship

to the EU. With France gradually

accepting reduced privileges, England's

right to a "rebate" of its contributions to

the EU came under fire. In fact, as a result

of the deal between France and Germany,

Tony Blair of England and Jacques Chirac

will not be holding a meeting at the end

of the year as planned--because the

"rebate" issue has become so hot. It just

goes to show that imperialism can never

really resolve trade issues peacefully.

In this case, France and Germany have

agreed that giving development aid to

peripheral European states is more

important than France's own internal

farming. They have sought to speed up

their neighbors' economic growth, partly

to slow down the outflow of migrants

coming from their neighbors. As of now,

the European Union of 15 countries plans

to add 10 more countries. Turkey is

excluded from that list. Since Turkey is

more of a U.$. puppet-regime, it is not

surprising that the United $tates spoke

up on behalf of the European Union's

admission of Turkey. As of now, there is

still a disagreement between European

and U.$. imperialism over Turkey. A

diplomat representative of the EU, Javier

Solana said, "`The United States must

understand that putting Turkey into the

European Union is not like putting

Mexico into a free trade agreement. We

treat Turkey far better than you treat

Mexico."

Note: Elaine Sciolino, "A Fight Over

Farms Ends, Opening Way to Wider

Europe," New York Times 25Oct2002,

p. a3.

France swallows

imperialist trade privilege

Why the United $tates does not

attack northern Korea yet

San Francisco Prison protest exposes SHU brutality

copy of the flyer can be

downloaded at http://

www.prisoncensorship.info/archive/etext/

prisons).

The SHU is a prison within a

prison. It consists of 6x9 foot cells

with prisoners locked up at least

22 hours a day, in conditions of

sensory deprivation: no daylight,

no human contact, no training or

educational activities, and no

phone access. Guards subject

prisoners to strip searches and

shackles every time they leave

their cells. The only regular

release from the cell is to an

exercise cell that is just a larger

version of the SHU cell. As a

former SHU prisoner commented,

"I wouldn't wish that on my worse

enemy."

A federal court found

conditions at the Pelican Bay SHU

facility to be unconstitutional in

1995. The court ruled that

prisoners suffered gratuitous and

racist beatings and that medical

facilities were inadequate.

Prisoners report that little has

changed since that ruling.

Corcoran prison is infamous for

its "gladiator fights," staged

between 1988 and 1996. MIM met

one man who had been in the

Corcoran SHU in 1995 "in the

thick of the mess." He explained

how guards sent him to the SHU

on the pretext that he had attacked

them with a ballpoint pen--while he was on the

ground handcuffed behind his back. He said that

false charges such as this were common grounds

for lockup in the SHU.

A poster on the side of the protest SHU in San

Francisco quoted a Pelican Bay SHU prisoner:

"...the most ridiculous information is used to

support our validation and SHU placement, i.e.

assisting each other in legal work, signing a card

for a dying prisoner and just about any speech

or association that has anything to do with gang

Continued on page 8...

MIM Notes 271 · December 1, 2002· Page 4

The war with Iraq has presented a

unique historical problem to the rulers

and the people opposed to the war in Iraq.

The 1991 war against Iraq had U.N.

blessings, so now it is not surprising that

polls show the U.$. public wants U.N.

backing again.

A poll of Illinois voters is typical. Only

18 percent of Illinois voters opposes the

war categorically. 17 percent is in favor

of the war no matter what. In other words,

the opposition is very weak-kneed.(1) If

the U.N. were for the war, we would see

a huge slingshot in the polls, and the only

reason the U.N. has become a focal point

is that imperialists France and Russia

have drawn the line against u.$.

imperialism, on behalf of their own

interests.

Illinois is above average in opposition

to the war. More than half still want more

proof that Iraq is developing weapons of

mass destruction.(1) Yet it's number on

opposition to war whether internationally

backed is the same as opposition in

Massachusetts, less than 20%. We cannot

realistically expect any better in

Amerikkka, land of the labor aristocracy.

To expect better is to lie to ourselves and

delay the day of real change by spreading

illusions. The oppressor nation of

Amerikkka is only arguing over the

strategy of oppression. These polls

confirm each other and countless polls

going back decades on Amerikkkan

attitudes toward Third World countries

in general.

If the other imperialist countries were

united against a Third World country or

were at least not willing to draw the line

against imperialist action, the

Amerikkkan public would be jumping up

and down for war. Since history often

proves the imperialists willing to

collaborate against the Third World, we

do not hinge our opposition to the war

on the United Nations. At best, the United

Nations is giving some people false

hopes, when in fact we need a determined

fight by the majority in the united $tates

to stop the war-mongers. We cannot

afford to wait for the results of diplomatic

maneuvers.

It is a mistake to discount bourgeois

polls completely because they are done

by corporations and because each

corporation asks different questions that

result in contradictory poll results. The

biggest problem with polls by the

corporations is that they are boring and

repetitive questions, as shallow as their

askers. Yet the questions they do cover

are of value. Academic polls and

widespread communist discussions with

the public will prove much of these polls

to be accurate information if synthesized

and comprehended correctly. Lenin

instructed us to do just that, despite what

numerous critics at the "RCP-USA" and

other philistines have said about MIM

lately. Here is what Lenin said almost

directly addressing the kind of

philistinism in question:

"We have decided to begin with

statistics, fully aware of course that

statistics are deeply antipathetic to certain

readers, who prefer `flattering deception'

to `base truths,' and to certain authors,

who are prone to smuggle in political

contraband under cover of `general'

disquisitions about internationalism,

cosmopolitanism, nationalism,

patriotism, etc."(2) Lenin went on to

quote at length from various

governments' statistics, because he knew

that if he did not work on the basis of

some factual generalization, the

philistines would fill in the gap with their

inaccurate fantasies and chauvinism.

There is never a choice between rejecting

all corporate and government

information on the one hand and

accepting a perfect independent

communist set of information on the

other hand. Those who act that way are

idealists opening themselves up to

chauvinist vulnerabilities that dominate

the superstructure under imperialism.

In fact, the different questions by the

corporate pollsters are a good thing. We

at MIM oppose those who see one

counter-example of opinion and then

proclaim all polls flawed. Such a view

stems from the settler political economy

and individualism of the Anglo-Saxon

world that does not believe in the

existence of social groups anyway. Such

individualist ideology opposing statistics

Polls on war with Iraq:

Going it alone is the problem, say Amerikkkans

has to be defeated thoroughly for class

struggle to advance.

Large demonstrations in San Francisco

do not prove that the rest of the country

is anti-war. We believe there is such a

thing as an Amerikkkan nation. It is an

oppressor nation. It exists and supports

war. If the anti-war movement wants to

say that its position is the prevailing

opinion, it needs to prove it. When we

see demonstrations in all the major cities

that look like San Francisco's

demonstrations, then we can at least

conclude that the cities are opposed. As

a matter of fact, data shows that urban

people are more anti-militarist. Rural and

suburban whites are generally more pro-

war. Before we anti-war people claim we

have the majority, we should at least

prove it in our home base--the cities.

There are many who like to lie on this

point as if lying would be a shortcut to

success for the anti-war movement.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

It is a nine-digit figure of Amerikkkans

we are talking about that year in and year

out support war against anything

supposedly anti-U.$. in the Middle East.

No amount of lying is going to make their

fundamental views go away.

Note:
1. http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-
nws-ipoll27s1.html
2. V.I. Lenin "Statistics and Sociology" with
January 1917 preface

making a variety of determined efforts.

One of the researchers of this article most

applauded the hard-working activist who

donned a large mask of George Bush in

order to let passers-by spit on him.

The present writer preferred the two

dogs carrying signs: "Another mutt

against imperialism." It again raised the

question of whether we insult dogs when

we call those in the White House dogs

and their lackeys, "running dogs of

imperialism." We cannot remember any

dogs sending out an air force to bomb

another country into the Stone Age.

The logistics of the rally were not the

greatest. Many speakers spoke too softly

to be heard or one could blame the sound

system crew. A counter- demonstration

of about 30 people drew a larger crowd

of people from the rally with anti-war

signs, probably because there were no

demonstration marshals on hand to show

them where the anti-war rally was on

Boston Common. The rally activists said

the rally was bigger than they expected.

Perhaps as a result, one usually sharp

speaker we will not mention by name

bumbled through his speech obviously

Boston rallies

against war on Iraq

trying to come up with innocuous things

to say that would appeal to such a large

crowd. On the whole though, the rally

activists deserve credit for bringing out

a large cross-section of Massachusetts

and New England. Once again, we warn

readers not to take the situation in

California as representative. Even in

Massachusetts, the peace movement is on

the offensive, setting the agenda, but the

war-mongers start on top.

Notes:

1. http://www.globe.com/dailynews/

3 0 7 / r e g i o n / T i m _ R o b b

ins_joins_thousands_of%3A.shtml

USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll

A survey of 1,014 adults age 18+, November 8-10, asked: "Suppose Saddam

Hussein does not comply with the United Nations resolutions passed [today/

on Friday]. Do you think the United States should invade Iraq with ground

troops -- only if the U.N. votes to authorize the use of U.S. ground troops,

even if the U.N. does not vote to authorize the use of U.S. ground troops, or do

you think the United States should not send ground troops to Iraq at all?" The

results imply that more than two-thirds would support the war if the UN were

to get in line with the U.$. agenda.--MC12.

MIM Notes 271 · December 1, 2002· Page 5

Did you know?

There are more

than 200 back

issues of MIM

Notes available

on the MIM

website? Not only

can you browse

more than 15

years of the

newspaper, you

can also keep up

with the very

latest on MIM

agitation

campaigns,

prisoner news, all

the latest on the

U$ war, and much

more. MIM's

website is an

indispensable tool

for the

revolutionary

movement. Get

involved!

www.etext.org/

Politics/MIM

Our poll detailed below, conducted

over some hours at the Boston rally

November 3, should not be taken as

representative of the country, but rather

of demonstrators in Boston. According

to police estimates, the rally had 15,000

people, so these percentages probably say

something very approximate about

15,000 people.

November 3, 2002 poll

1. What is the cause of this war in

Iraq? Oil, 24/85 = 28%.Preventing other

countries from obtaining weapons of

mass destruction like our own, 5/85 =

6%. Having an excuse to install fascism

here, 3/85 = 4%. Other, 53/85 = 62%.

The vast majority of those stating

"other" said they chose so because "all

of the above" was really true. Some found

a combination of reasons such as two out

of the three above reasons. Another

reason given was "Bush's ego." Another

was "Americans' desire for a comfortable

life."

MIM would not suggest asking this

question again. It proved that the

audience had great ambivalence on

naming the reason for the war, because

they believed multiple reasons were the

cause. Respondents offered in-depth

intellectual responses that are difficult to

pin down in a quick (three hour) poll.

2. How would you rate Bush's

intelligence on a scale of one to seven

with one being the lowest? The average

response was 2.5, with 33 of 81 valid

responses rating Bush a one.

There were many giggles about this

question, but also some people grunted

before answering. We had four answers

of "negative one" and one of "negative

22.5 million." All the combined negative

answers were coded as one. Clearly

amongst the 33 giving Bush the lowest

possible score, there was some

frustration, which led to grunting and

amazed condemnations. The intelligence

of Bush is a very hot issue for our

demonstrators, with many wondering

how it is possible for what is happening

to be so far off from what they would

imagine themselves.

Although MIM asked the question, we

did so to find out what the demonstrators

think, not because we believe intelligence

is the issue ourselves. This is another way

of saying that MIM's prior knowledge of

the Amerikkkan population gave rise to

the very question we asked. Questions

do not appear out of vacuums. We would

rate Bush above-average in intelligence,

although probably much less intelligent

than some other presidents. The real issue

is the politics of money. That's what

determines who gets to the White House.

Again, MIM is out of step with the

demonstrators, but it does not bother us.

3. With 1 being "hopeful" and 7

being "hopeless," how do you feel

about the Democrats overall? The

average response out of 78 valid

responses was 4.7.

One persyn responded "one" because

"I'm hopeful about all people." Such an

answer may frustrate those individualists

who oppose all statistical knowledge, but

we would say such answers average out,

with as many leaning in one direction as

in another. And even if such people were

common in such a way as to cause biased

answers, some imperfect group-level

information is better than none. On the

whole, we would not say that a majority

of people were answering the question

in such a way as to make it meaningless.

This was a well-designed question in

the sense that there was a wide variety of

answers. It shows that the crowd was not

completely radical and in fact Shannon

O'Brien [Democratic candidate for

Governor] was wise to send people to

leaflet there. It appears that radical

internationalism is contending for the

hearts of thousands of Democrats in

Massachusetts. As we point out

elsewhere, it confirms what the pundits

are already talking about, namely the

existence of a question whether pro-war

Democrats will stay in that party while

others bolt for the Green Party that they

are already considering in light of other

polls.

4. Using your own definition of

"terrorism," would you say the United

States is terrorist? Yes, 59/81 = 73%.

No, 9/81 = 11%. Don't know, 13/81 =

16%.

We had a handful of people say the

United States is not terrorist, because

only its government is, not the people.

Another comment among the "no" and

"don't know" respondents was "yes, if

they go to this war." Judging from such

comments, there are some people who are

experiencing politics as they go along and

are prepared to alter prior judgements

based on what happens with this

particular war. The answer to this

question, even in the "no" and "don't

know" column shows that the people in

this demonstration are close to or ready

to take a very hard-line position on U.$.

terrorism.

This result was perhaps the most

encouraging in that it shows that people

who demonstrate against the war may not

be people just seeking a better strategy

of oppression. It appears that there are at

least a few thousand people who despite

the propaganda machine, already find

their own government guilty of terrorism.

For those abroad wondering if it is

impossible for Amerikkans to reach some

of the same conclusions that they do, once

again, the answer is the truth is the truth

everywhere. Not only the Third World

people see the truth about U.$.

imperialism. The internationalist

Amerikkkans may be in the tiny minority

but they still exist in the thousands,

perhaps even the millions in the u$a as a

whole.

5. Do you feel you persynally have

the right to condemn terrorism? No,

5/78 = 6%. Yes, 71/78 = 91%. Don't

know, 2/78 = 3%.

Questions 4 and 5 worked both better

and worse than expected. I did not expect

so many demonstrators to say that the

United States is terrorist. I expected a

much more even breakdown and then a

breakdown within that breakdown by

question five. As it turns out, a high

proportion of demonstrators condemned

the terrorism of the united $tates and then

said they had the right to condemn it

persynally. It would be accurate to say

that most demonstrators accept a verbal

level of engagement on principles. They

do not have to see U.$. terrorism ended

before they feel they have the right to

condemn terrorism in general. MIM

disagrees, but unlike many people who

believe in the tactics of lying in all

difficult situations, this is not something

MIM believes lies can successfully

overcome. We report the percentages;

even though they are against our own

opinion.

On doing our own poll

We asked these questions in public in

the demonstration in groups ranging in

size from one to six. As the

demonstration went on, the more able-

bodied and determined remained in the

cold. The mere launch of the marching

part of the rally left behind most of the

demonstrators. We found that asking

more than two people simultaneously

often resulted in people walking away in

the midst of the questions.

As usual there were complaints about

the questions being vague. MIM again

states that some information--even

imperfect information--about groups is

better than none at all, so individualists

should stop resisting that information.

While the U.S. Government Census

takers have the relatively clear-cut job

of counting people, people are being born

and dying the whole time of the census.

People living illegally get missed and so

on. That does not mean we do not benefit

from having the approximate count that

the U.S. Government does do. It's the

same with all other statistical

information. We have to learn when not

to nitpick and when we are receiving

information that is better than nothing.

Even very poorly constructed

information can be useful in some

contexts and synthesized with other

information in others.

Do your own poll

For people who would question MIM's

analysis of the Iraq and war situation, we

would suggest the following immediate

exercise. The question that went most

smoothly was our question about

"terrorism." The following questions

should go well in any city or town in

Amerika and we recommend that people

try it some places in the South, the West

and the countryside before concluding

that the u$a's population is like Boston

demonstrators.

1. Using your own definition of

terrorism, would you say the U.S.

Government is a terrorist organization?

Yes; no; don't know.

2. On a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 being

extreme disapproval and 7 being extreme

approval, do you approve the way the

current government is handling the Iraq

issue?

3. Would you support a war against Iraq

if England, France, Israel and Canada

were the only countries to join with the

use of bases in Qatar (a tiny Arab

country)? Yes; no; don't know.

MIM conducts a poll of its own at Boston demo

We have to

learn when

not to nitpick

and when we

are receiving

information

that is better

than nothing.

MIM Notes 271 · December 1, 2002· Page 6

questioning could be forgotten, or seen

as empty rhetoric." (1) That's exactly

what Kerry did. As the only presidential

candidate for 2004 willing to talk about

the "War on Terror" and "question" the

proposed war in Iraq, Kerry showed his

true mettle when it came time to vote.

After all, he did say every time he spoke

on foreign affairs that he supported

President Bush.

Kerry's vote is especially embarrassing

to the reformist peace movement, which

somehow expected better, because he had

no Republican opponent boxing him into

a corner in his election. Also, Kerry does

not need money and does not really need

to pander to military or oil interests just

on that basis. His wife has the Heinz

fortune. The real reason for Kerry's vote

is that the Amerikkkan labor aristocracy

will not vote for someone who opposes

the war and Kerry has made that

conclusion. As an imperialist, Kerry does

have the power to oppose the war and he

can even gain support from his

constituents and reformist activists for so

doing, but he turns them away, because

he has predicted that he cannot be elected

president without the labor aristocracy's

support. That means he has calculated

that the Amerikkkan majority is pro-war.

That is an implicit poll, better than many

others, and a real statement on the

Amerikkkan population.

For that matter, the Boston Globe--

while suspect for its own war-mongering

position--has found further evidence that

Kerry is right about the population. Even

in Massachusetts, George Bush's

approval rating increases the more he

talks about war with Iraq. Prior to recent

talk on Iraq, Bush's approval rating was

down below 50%. Now he is back above

it again at 55% approval in

Massachusetts. 59% of Massachusetts

people polled said that Bush made a

strong case for war on Iraq. Only 19%

said Bush's case is "very weak." 58% of

Democrats also said Bush had a strong

case. Bush's only problem will be if he

cannot line up an international coalition,

because only 17% will support him

then.(2)

As a result of Kerry's actions, the

largest number of protest signs at the

Boston rally November 3rd was for a

write-in candidate named Randall

Forsberg running as a Democrat opposed

to the war. The fact that Forsberg is

running against Kerry (another

Democrat) shows the whole problem

with the one-party state in Massachusetts.

Ironically, the immediate victim of

Kerry's vote was Democrat Shannon

O'Brien who had to sweat out a closer

governor's election than she wanted with

polls showing her in a dead-heat with

Mitt Romney. In fact 0'Brien lost the

race. The Green Party governor candidate

Jill Stein who spoke at the rally drew 4

or 5% in pre-election polls and 3% of

the actual vote.

MIM endorses no candidate, but would

like our readers not to be naive. At the

Sen. Kerry's vote proves that the war-mongers are on top

rally, Shannon O'Brien activists were not

highly visible, but some did hand out

leaflets with a xeroxed letter from former

opponent Robert Reich endorsing

O'Brien and saying that the only choice

is between O'Brien and Romney. The

Boston Globe also had an article being

handed out by O'Brien written by Joan

Vennochi. Like Reich, Vennochi ran out

the standard stuff that Stein was

siphoning off votes from O'Brien.(3)

It sounds oh-so-shrewd, but it is not.

In Vermont, in some races, the

Republican is an afterthought. In some

places in the United $tates, the

Republicans could easily become the

third or weaker party. If the Greens are

party number two, the Republicans

cannot be adding any seats in Congress.

One would think that the Democratic

Party would figure out that that outcome

is in its favor in the Congress. Instead,

Republicans are giving money to Greens

to run against Democrats in the West to

siphon off votes, while Democrats do not

help Greens in the places where the

Greens could be number two.

Now in Massachusetts, those

Democrats who feel trapped by a

Democratic legislature with the power to

override a governor must pull the lever

for the Republicans; even though only

15% of Massachusetts is really

Republican--and probably those, again,

only because there is no choice other than

the Democrats. This means that in some

instances, Democratic success cannot go

any further. In Massachusetts,

Democratic success has reached near its

limit, which is why the public has elected

Republican governors in the immediate

past and did so again by electing Romney.

So the question becomes, why not elect

a Green governor with a Democratic

Party legislature.

MIM will answer the question. The

Democrats do not want a Green Party

candidate for governor with a real shot,

because they have more in common with

Republicans. That's why they give that

shot to the Republicans every time. Each

year the Democrats go to the Greens and

say "lesser evil," but if Democrats were

really closer to Greens than Republicans,

there would be no Republican Party to

speak of in Massachusetts.

The stupidity of the narrow-minded

Democrats is dogma. They sing the

"lesser evil" song every time, no matter

what. It would take little effort to split

up the Massachusetts Democratic Party

and allow a third party breakaway to

leave Republicans in the dust of third

place. Yet it does not happen, thanks to

the chokehold of Big Money on politics

that prevents even the most obvious

political realities from reaching the light

of day. As time wears on, even the only

state that voted for Democrat George

McGovern in 1972 has to listen to

Republicans dominate the press day-

after-day as the only "real" alternative

to the Democrats.

The truth is endlessly degraded in

electoral politics, because candidates feel

they have to compete with others also

allowed to dodge divisive issues. As a

result, candidates say what people want

to hear and they do not engage with the

truth often.

This is another reason that MIM does

not involve itself in electoral politics.

Readers only need recall that not a single

candidate for Massachusetts governor

answered MIM's questions about

Massachusetts prisons. Those candidates

would not be able to get away with that

if the truth were not that the vast majority

of Amerikkkans in Massachusetts do not

care that much about issues. These

candidates know that tough substance is

not what the population wants to hear,

which is why Romney's ads are all

haircut, blonde dye, lipstick and his kids

jumping off rafts. We can be sure that

millions would not be spent on such ads

if political consultants had not figured out

that a majority likes them.

People stuck in electoral politics

become slaves to "lesser evils" dogmas

not to mention fund-raising with special

interests and pulling levers every couple

years as a substitute for real politics.

Playing the game only legitimizes it.

Voters who complain about the process

should see that there are other ways. In

plebiscites, there is no opportunist

competition of candidates, only a thumbs

up or down on questions of substance or

the performance of a leader. As we write

this story, voters across the united $tates

are complaining about "negative"

political advertising. Most of that sort of

complaint is rooted in the belief that

politics should be entertainment, not

issues. These people are perturbed that

negative ads disturbed their harmonious

music show, their ball game on ESPN or

their porn channel, which may or may

not be called porn. Those people who are

not super-powerful but instead ordinary

yet pursue entertainment above profit or

anything else--these people we call the

gender aristocracy, and in the context of

a discussion of political campaigns, we

have nothing further to say about it. It is

the people who are serious about issues

but who complain about negative

political ads that concern us.

There is no other way in a system of

electoral opportunism for candidates to

show where they differ from other

candidates than by attacking them. The

"negative" ads by-and-large are the most

true part of the electoral process that the

united $tates has. The candidates speak

mostly truth about each other; although

they do sometimes invent it and hope not

to be caught. Without those negative ads,

there'd be no discussion of issues at all

within the bourgeois process.

Once people learn what happens to the

truth in electoral campaigns, and once

they realize it was Lenin who said a

vanguard party should be unpopular but

speak unvarnished truth, a large number

will turn to communist politics. While we

defend individual liberties, we

communists have seen through electoral

politics and the kind of "majority rule"

where one country's majority decides to

bomb another's.

Notes:
1. Anne E. Kornblutt, Boston Globe
16Sep2002.
2. Frank Phillips, Bostong Globe 2Nov2002.
3. "A vote for Stein is a vote for Romney,"
Boston Globe, 31Oct2002.

Militarism is war-mongering or the

advocacy of war or actual carrying out

of war or its preparations.

While true pacifists condemn all

violence as equally repugnant, we

Maoists do not consider self-defense

or the violence of oppressed nations

against imperialism to be militarism.

Militarism is mostly caused by

imperialism at this time. Imperialism

is the highest stage of capitalism--

seen in countries like the United

$tates, England and France.

Under capitalism, capitalists often

profit from war or its preparations.

Yet, it is the proletariat that does the

dying in the wars. The proletariat

wants a system in which people do not

have self-interest on the side of war-

profiteering or war for imperialism.

Militarism is one of the most

important reasons to overthrow

capitalism. It even infects oppressed

nations and causes them to fight each

other.

It is important not to let capitalists

risk our lives in their ideas about war

and peace or the environment. They

have already had two world wars

admitted by themselves in the last 100

years and they are conducting a third

right now against the Third World.

Even a one percent annual chance of

nuclear war destruction caused by

capitalist aggressiveness or "greed" as

the people call it should not be tolerated

by the proletariat. After playing

Russian Roulette (in which the bullet

chamber is different each time and not

related at all to the one that came up in

previous spins) with 100 chambers and

one bullet, the chance of survival is

only 60.5% after 50 turns. In other

words, a seemingly small one percent

annual chance of world war means

eventual doom. After 100 years or turns

of Russian Roulette, the chances of

survival are only 36.6%. After 200

years, survival has only a 13.4%

chance.

What is militarism?

Continued from page 1...

MIM Notes 271 · December 1, 2002· Page 7

Berkeley California -- Voters rejected

a ballot measure that would have made

it illegal for coffee shops to sell coffee

that wasn't certified Fair Trade or

organic. Coffee shops, including

Starbucks and Peets, spent thousands of

dollars to finance opposition to this

measure which would cost them roughly

10% more for beans. The measure was

voted down by over 70% of Berkeley

voters.

Coffee is certified as Fair Trade if

growers receive at least $1.26 per pound

($1.41 for organic) and the importers are

obligated to provide credit to the growers.

Opponents of the measure complained

that it would stifle consumer choice. And

in what is often considered the most

liberal city in the country, voters

apparently agreed. MIM would say that

there is nothing wrong with restricting

peoples freedom. We are in favor of

restricting the freedom to murder,

restricting the freedom to enslave,

restricting the freedom to exploit,

restricting the freedom to oppress, and

more in the name of ensuring all people

survival rights including the right to food,

housing, and medical care. There is

nothing wrong with forcing Amerikan

corporations and Amerikan consumers to

pay a little more for the labor from which

they greatly benefit.

Berkeley is a wealthy city East of San

Francisco with a heavy concentration of

students. It is no surprise to MIM that

these people do not want to give up

persynal freedoms like the freedom to

choose which brand of coffee to drink.

While people around the world are

literally dying at the hands of

imperialism, Berkeley residents want to

preserve their right to have a nice cheap

cup of coffee. No doubt this measure

would have faired even worse elsewhere

in the country.

The Fair Trade coffee campaign is

being spearheaded by San Francisco-

based Global Exchange. It focuses

exclusively on small farms which

account for 70% of the worlds coffee. On

their website Global Exchange explains

the focus on the price paid for coffee:

"Coffee is the second largest US import

after oil, and the US consumes one-fifth

of all the world's coffee, making it the

largest consumer in the world. But few

Americans realize that agriculture

workers in the coffee industry often toil

in what can be described as `sweatshops

Voters reject living wage for coffee growers

in the fields.' Many small coffee farmers

receive prices for their coffee that are less

than the costs of production, forcing them

into a cycle of poverty and debt."

According to Global Exchange, coffee

prices fluctuate widely but generally

hover around $1/pound. More recently

growers have been receiving prices as

low as 20-40 cents per pound.

This campaign by Global Exchange

has not been without impact in the United

$tates. The number of coffee shops

carrying Fair Trade coffee has increased

dramatically over the past few years, and

in response to protests and public

pressure Starbucks introduced Fair Trade

Certified coffee in October of 2000.

MIM supports forcing Amerikan

corporations to pay more money for

goods they import from the Third World.

The tremendous wealth in this country

comes from the exploitation of Third

World workers. At the same time we

recognize that reforms within capitalism

that give a slightly higher wage to these

workers will not end their exploitation

or eliminate the fundamentally

oppressive system of imperialism.(1) The

only way to ensure survival rights for the

world's people is to overthrow

imperialism.

Notes:

1. Global Exchange admits as much.

Workers on large coffee farms generally

earn $2-3 per day in harsh working

conditions. The Fair Trade campaign

does not address these workers. Global

Exchange explains "Fair Trade is

fundamentally focused on the small

farmer, the producer of the great majority

of the world's coffee. Therefore, it cannot

address all of the social inequities

associated with coffee production around

the world. As noted earlier, by

deliberately excluding plantations from

the Fair Trade coffee market, the

movement does little to improve the lot

of landless farmworkers employed on

those estates." Working within the

capitalist system and relying on the

marketplace to achieve their ends they

are forced into the position that "any

discussion of opening Fair Trade markets

to estate owners (and farmworkers)

should be postponed until the market

grows large enough to absorb them

without undermining the position of the

small farmer cooperatives."

UNITED

FRONT

Get the new issue of MIM Theory, #14, and read the latest
theory on building the movement to overthrow
imperialism once and for all, in 174 pages. Articles include
MIM congress resolutions, history from the Spanish Civil
War to Puerto Rico, Kenya, and Stalin -- plus international
documents, reviews, and much more. Send $7.50 to the
address on page 2.

On October 5 a coalition of activist

groups held a "Poor People's March for

Justice" in San Francisco to oppose

Propositions N & R, ballot initiatives

which would cut general assistance to the

homeless and reduce the number of

apartments under rent control.

Proposition N passed; proposition R

failed. Proposition N cuts the monthly

general assistance allowance for

homeless people from $395 to $59 (from

$395) and requires they stay in a shelter

to get this money.

MIM attended the rally and distributed

a reprint of the article from the October

1 issue of MIM Notes "San Fran

homeless become political fodder: Care

Not Cash provides neither." The rally

began in the Mission, a heavily Latino

neighborhood, with participation from a

number of homeless people and day

laborers and with speakers in Spanish

appealing to the people on the streets to

vote on Tuesday to defeat these ballot

measures.

As the article in MIM Notes explained,

"Homelessness is a chronic problem of

capitalism. Even in a wealthy imperialist

country like the United $tates people are

living on the streets because they don't

have the money to pay for housing." The

other literature distributed at the rally was

limited to statements about the

propositions and their negative effects,

without any analysis of why we have

homelessness or how to fight it so

participants and passers by welcomed

MIM's flyer.

Many people attending the rally did

have a more comprehensive analysis of

the situation, including those who came

with a banner that read "$5 billion a year

for the poor, not for Israel's war." These

connections to global survival rights are

crucial to make within Amerika's borders

where the majority of the population

enjoys a very high standard of living

compared to the rest of the world.

Homelessness caused by capitalism is a

far bigger problem than what we see in

the United $tates. In Third World

countries, where the U.$. props up puppet

government with economic and military

aid, literally millions of people are

without adequate shelter, food, medicine

and even water.

Although the rally was focused on the

need to get out to vote against these

propositions, speakers did represent the

position that voting will not solve the

problem of homelessness. One speaker

decryed the electoral system in the U.$.

but stated that it is still worth voting on

these ballot propositions where we can

have an effect. MIM agrees with this

position. We do not support voting for

imperialist candidates because there is no

difference between them and the

independent candidates can only remain

independent as long as they lose the race.

But for local elections and ballot

initiatives there are some winnable

battles over important issues that can be

worth voting on.

All the while we are discussing these

issues of homelessness within the united

states we need to keep in mind what MIM

wrote about Proposition N: "We should

not just be fighting to end homelessness

in Amerika. The denial of basic needs,

San Francisco voters pass anti-homeless initiative

putting profit before survival rights,

anywhere in the world is a crime."

MIM Notes 271 · December 1, 2002· Page 8

MIM opposes electoral politics, above

all because currently the U.S.

Government as constituted reserves the

right to determine what happens in all

countries in the world. The majority

inside U.S. borders is in effect

determining what happens everywhere.

In addition, the electoral process in 2002

remains ugly in the sense of ignorance

of issues and voting based on simple lines

such as race or ethnicity.

The Baltimore Sun is a bourgeois paper

much more optimistic about electoral

politics than MIM Notes is. Yet the

Baltimore Sun admits this: "In Alabama,

Mississippi and South Carolina, there is

still a tipping-point phenomenon at work.

If the black share of the population

reaches 25 percent to 30 percent, and a

Democrat needs about one-third of the

white vote to win, that one-third is

difficult or often impossible to achieve.

For many voters in these states, the

Democratic Party is considered "the

black party" and thus to be avoided."(1)

Although ex-Klan leader David Duke

lost his races for governor and Senate in

Louisiana, he won the majority of the

white vote each time he ran and only lost

because Blacks are 30% of the population

there.(2) David Duke is an elected

Republican Party leader of his local

parish. His connections to other

prominent Republicans are strong:

Pat Robertson the evangelical Christian

leader and one-time Republican Party

presidential candidate endorsed Duke for

governor of Louisiana in 1990 and gave

John Ashcroft a 100% rating on issues.

Attorney General John Ashcroft gave

a 1998 interview to neo-Confederate

journal Southern Partizan magazine

where he praised it for "setting the record

straight" on "Southern patriots like

Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, and

Jefferson Davis." The same Southern

Partizan magazine called David Duke "a

populist spokesperson for a recapturing

of the American ideal."(3)

In Texas, a Black man named Ron Kirk

ran for Senate. "Democratic strategists

calculate that Kirk will need about 35

percent of the white vote to win. He's

currently getting 30 percent and needs a

historic late surge to make history

(undecided white voters have always

broken against black candidates in the

past)."(4)

Similarly, Governor Jim Hodges knows

he needs one-third of the white vote to

win in South Carolina.(5) Pundits say

Democrat Senator Mary Landrieu will

win in Louisiana because she polls a

whopping 31% of the white vote. (She is

a white blonde herself.)(6)

In 2000, whites cast 81% of votes

across the U$A. Bush won 54% of that

vote in 2000. However, that number

largely covers up that racial voting is a

regional phenomenon. In California,

Bush lost all racial groups in 2000.(7) In

the South though, it is generally

impossible for Democrats to win,

because they simply cannot get 35 or

40% of the white vote.

A book by John B. Judis and Ruy

Teixeira titled "The Emerging

Democratic Majority" says that the

growth of the Hispanic vote and other

demographic factors spell doom for the

Republican Party soon. Others are

starting to notice the racial dynamics of

politics, whereas in the past, civics

teachers and pundits opposed the notion

that Amerikkkan politics are racial.

David S. Broder of the Washington Post

noted the pattern correctly: "Ever since

Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-S.C.), who is

retiring this year as the longest-serving

senator in history, switched parties in

1964 over the issue of civil rights, this

state -- like the rest of the South -- has

been trending Republican. In 2000,

George W. Bush carried South Carolina

easily by capturing the white vote, 70

percent to 26 percent, while Al Gore took

91 percent of the black vote. The rest of

the Old Confederacy followed the same

pattern, and the national election turned

on whether Florida would be the lone

holdout from a GOP [s]weep of the

The "white vote" is no myth

Electoral politics remain based on race

region."(8)

In 1994, the Republicans won the

Congress and white men from the South

came to dominate even more than before.

Newt Gingrich of Georgia became

majority leader in the House. His top two

lieutenants were Texans. In the Senate it

is Trent Lott from Mississippi in charge

for Republicans. In the Senate, there has

not been a Black from the South since

1879.(9)

Notes:
1. Jack W. Germond, "3 elements may loosen
GOP grip of the South," The Baltimore Sun
3Nov2002.
2. Associated Press 29Sept91. (New York Times
19Oct91, p. A1 says he got 58% of white votes.)
www.texaswest.com/archive/99/april/28/
opinion.htm
3. http://www.commondreams.org/views01/
0122-04.htm
4. http://www.upi.com/
view.cfm?StoryID=20021104-073003-4856r
5. http://www.heraldonline.com/local/story/
1882885p-1870880c.html
6. http://www.wbrz.com/stories/102702/
new_landvote.shtml
7. http://www.upi.com/
view.cfm?StoryID=20021016-094913-4016r
8. David S. Broder, "Race looms large in
Southern Races," Washington Post 13Oct2002.
9. http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/
DailyNews/texas_021021.html

activity or a violation of law or prison

code.

"...CDC refuses to define `gang

activity' and so in the eyes of CDC,

everything and anything is gang activity.

And, should a prisoner have no gang

activity, there is an exception clause that

allows them to keep us in the SHU

anyway.

"...the means for obtaining release from

the SHU [are] paroling, debriefing,

dying, and the loss of sanity."

SHU prisoners at Pelican Bay started

another hunger strike October 19th to

expose the conditions there. This action

in San Francisco was timed to publicize

their struggle. Although the protest

received no direct mainstream media

attention, the Pelican Bay hunger strike

received sudden interest by the media

after several days of this vigil on the

outside. But even if no mainstream media

attention had been gained this action was

an overwhelming success. It was a

demonstration of the numbers of people

that a few dedicated activists can reach

and educate, and the magnitude of impact

we can have.

A number of former prisoners stopped

to sign the petition. Those who had not

San Francisco Prison protest exposes SHU brutality

been in the SHU stressed how bad the

conditions are in the prisons even outside

of the SHU. Guard brutality, medical

neglect, lack of education and inadequate

food are commonplace throughout the

California prison system. A former guard

in the California Department of

Corrections who spoke out against

guards' abuses signed the petition.

Speaking out cost him his job.

The vigil took place in an area

containing a cross-section of San

Francisco's population, including

business people and homeless. Activists

came face to face with the reality that

Amerika has the highest imprisonment

rate in the world. All who volunteered

outside the SHU were struck by the large

numbers of people walking by who had

been to prison. Many of the homeless had

been to prison.

A large number of tourists also stopped

at the exhibit. Tourists from other

countries were uniformly shocked that

the SHU form of solitary confinement is

legal in the United $tates.

The U.$. Government now holds about

a half million more prisoners than China;

even though China is four times the U.$.

population. In this so-called "free

country" freedom is imprisonment. The

U.$ imprisons more Black people than

did apartheid South Africa before

Mandela was president.

As in the rest of the country, people

from oppressed nations are imprisoned

in California at a disproportionate rate.

In 1998 the CDC reported that 34% of

the population in all CDC institutions

was Latino, and 31% was Black. The

population of the Security Housing Units

(SHUs) is even more disproportionate.

82% of those in SHUs were non-white,

and 52% of those in SHUs were Latino.

This compares to a California population

that was 32% Latino, and 7% Black in

1998.

Continued from page 3...

New York Times coverage of

Venezuela lacks one fact: election

The Amerikkkan mass media continue to run stories about the large protests

and counter-protests in Venezuela and calls for the resignation of President
Hugo Chavez. While these stories demonstrate the political instability in
Venezuela (which now includes military unrest) and report on the claims and
counter-claims regarding the validity of the protests, the Amerikkkan media
leaves out one thing--that Chavez won an election and his term is not up!

It goes to show that "democracy" in the sense of majority rule means nothing

to the Amerikkkan mass media despite pretenses to the contrary. MIM does
not hang its hat on such electoral processes, but these mass media often do.
Reading the New York Times, one would have thought that Hugo Chavez
was just another u.$.-installed dictator who never faced an election.

Note: "Venezuelan Leader Defies Military and Ignores Call for Election,"

New York Times 25Oct2002, p. a7.

MIM Notes 271 · December 1, 2002· Page 9

MIM Theory 2 and 3

Gender &

Revolutionary

Feminism

MIM's in-depth explanation of gender

oppresion, especially in the First World. A

classic collection of articles that no

revolutionary feminist should be without. 200

pages.

Send $5 cash, check, or stamps, or money

order to: MIM Distributors, PO Box
29670, Los Angeles CA 90029-0670

Nearly 3000 hypocritical or terribly

ignorant relatives of the World Trade

Center 911 victims are seeking $1 trillion

from the Saudi rich including the royal

family and government leaders for aiding

Al-Qaeda. For example, Liz Alderman

of Armonk, NY said, "`I've learned and

I believe that an awful lot of the funding

that enabled the terrorists to attack

America was provided by Saudi

Arabia.'"(1)

If anyone should be sued here, it is the

ones bringing the suit. Not only should

they pay all legal and defamation costs

for bringing the suit, but also they should

pay damages for their share of supporting

the U.S. Government that gave Bin

Laden, money, training and the most

advanced weapons in the 1980s.(2)

Here is how MSNBC explained it:

"Indeed, to this day, those involved in the

decision to give the Afghan rebels access

to a fortune in covert funding and top-

level combat weaponry continue to

defend that move in the context of the

Cold War. Sen. Orrin Hatch, a senior

Republican on the Senate Intelligence

Committee making those decisions, told

my colleague Robert Windrem that he

would make the same call again today

even knowing what bin Laden would do

subsequently. `It was worth it,' he said.

"`Those were very important, pivotal

matters that played an important role in

the downfall of the Soviet Union,' he

said."(1) The U.$. Government thought

it was worth it to train, arm and fund Bin

Laden so it could strike at the social-

imperialist "Soviet Union" in the 1980s.

Bin Laden is a clear example of "what

goes around, comes around."

After getting U.$. aid, Bin Laden

subverted the Saudi regimes, according

to the World Trade Center victim

relatives themselves.(1) In other words,

the CIA unleashed an extortionist on the

Saudi ruling class. The ones responsible

for that are the voters of the united $tates,

including people such as those bringing

the lawsuit against the Saudis.

This lawsuit is being opposed by the

Bush administration.(1) There may be a

section of imperialists waiting in the

wings to support this lawsuit, but thus

far it is a typical imperialist petty-

bourgeois lawsuit--people seeking even

more antagonism with the rest of the

world for the benefit of the flow of gravy

to their trough. The demand for $1 trillion

is nothing but war-propaganda, as any but

the most naive will realize, because there

is no way to extract that $1 trillion for

such a nonsensical cause except war to

take over Saudi assets. That means that

this imperialist country petty-bourgeoisie

bringing the lawsuit against the Saudis

wants an even wider and more ridiculous

war than what the united $tates is already

involved in.

A lot of namby-pamby "Marxists" are

constantly making excuses for the war-

mongering, chauvinism and hypocrisy of

the imperialist country petty-bourgeoisie

often mistakenly referred to as a

"proletariat." True, no doubt at least a

portion of the nearly 3000 relatives was

too busy watching NakedNews or

reading Maxim magazine to know that

their own government created the very

Saudi rulers they are now suing, but the

phony communists do nothing but delay

the day of the necessary transformation

of parasitic imperialist country

populations by not telling them the truth.

In contrast, like Stalin and the German

communists of his day in 1945 speaking

with Germans immediately after Hitler,

MIM tells Amerikkkans that they need

to change themselves and that they have

a long way to go. The communists of that

day told the Germans that they were "co-

responsible" for Hitler and that was the

truth that could not be evaded.

The reason that Bin Laden is so

effective today is previous support from

and experience working with the CIA.

The sooner Amerikkkans get that through

their thick skulls and strike down

hypocrits in denial on that point, the

sooner Amerikkkans will be able to live

with the rest of the world in peace.

Notes:

1. New York Times 25Oct2002, p. a15.

2. This should be known to even the

most dull Amerikkkans by now, as even

the Wonder Bread of media, MSNBC has

reported it: http://www.msnbc.com/

news/190144.asp?cp1=1

9/11 relatives turn responsibility upside down

the type of which claimed in 2002 day

after day that there was a white van. After

each sniper shooting the story was the

same from the eyewitnesses.(1)

"A 1993 review of 1,000 convictions

of people who were later found to be not

guilty revealed that eyewitness errors

were the single largest factor, accounting

for about half the cases."(2) At least

80,000 trials a year rely on eyewitnesses

for evidence.

Experiments show that the ruling class

has successfully brainwashed the public

into blaming someone for crime--

anyone--once a crime has happened. For

example, in an experiment with a staged

theft with 100 eyewitnesses, the

eyewitnesses faced a police lineup that

did not include the perpetrator. 21

eyewitnesses still picked someone from

the lineup. In a similar study, even when

the eyewitnesses knew that the criminal

might not be in the lineup, 33% still

picked the wrong person.

The figures for picking the right person

from the lineup are no better when the

actual perpetrator is in the lineup.

Researchers divided eyewitnesses into

two groups--people who were sure and

pointed quickly and those who had to

think about it.

Among the eyewitnesses sure they

found the culprit, only 70% picked the

right person from the lineup; 30% were

wrong. Among the eyewitnesses who

reasoned their way to a conclusion, the

accuracy rate was only 30%; 70% of the

time, these eyewitnesses picked the

wrong person.

To make matters worse, there is

"monkey-see-monkey-do" effect.

Witnesses who knew there were other

witnesses became more confident. This

confidence turns out to have no

relationship to accuracy.

Despite these studies, police do not

always put people with similar features

in the line-ups to force eyewitnesses to

make hard choices. They go on using the

same methods despite these studies that

have come out from 1981 to 1993.

The hypocritical Liberals who lead

these studies see the abysmal figures, but

they cling desperately to an asinine

system. "`Police are skeptical when I

present these findings,' said Dr. Wells.

`They're afraid of making witnesses

overly cautious. They want convictions,

not cautious witnesses. But we find the

right procedures minimize false

identifications while leaving the accurate

ones unchanged. If the culprit is there,

they'll spot him.'"(2) Seeking

respectability with the police--within the

system--these individualists refuse to

face the facts they gathered.

The truth is that the system only claims

to punish the appropriate individuals to

bolster its own legitimacy. In actuality,

the police and even the researchers don't

care about the obvious facts that have

made the fascism-crazed settlers of this

society willing to convict anyone without

any evidence. With so many false leads

in the sniper case and so much police

work done on those leads, it should be

obvious that cool objectivity does not rule

in our injustice system.

Notes:

1. "Power of Illusion: Those Seeing

White Vans Breathe Easier: So Do the

Drivers." 26Oct2002, p. a14.

2. New York Times 17Jan1995, pp. c1,

c6.

The white van baloney:

Sniper shows Amerikkka itself

Continued from page 1...

Police towing away a white minivan in Virginia. In this case, a couple of

innocent immigrants were detained, and ended up being turned over to

immigration authorities. --MC12

MIM Notes 271 · December 1, 2002· Page 10

MIM on

Prisons & Prisoners

MIM seeks to build public opinion

against Amerika's criminal injustice sys-

tem, and to eventually replace the bour-

geois injustice system with proletarian jus-

tice. The bourgeois injustice system im-

prisons and executes a disproportionately

large and growing number of oppressed

people while letting the biggest mass mur-

derers -- the imperialists and their lack-

eys -- roam free. Imperialism is not op-

posed to murder or theft, it only insists that

these crimes be committed in the interests

of the bourgeoisie.

"All U.S. citizens are criminals--

accomplices and accessories to the crimes
of U.$. oppression globally until the day
U.$. imperialism is overcome. All U.S.
citizens should start from the point of view
that they are reforming criminals."

MIM does not advocate that all

prisoners go free today; we have a
more effective program for fighting
crime as was demonstrated in China
prior to the restoration of capitalism
there in 1976. We say that all prisoners
are political prisoners because under
the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, all
imprisonment is substantively
political. It is our responsibility to
exert revolutionary leadership and
conduct political agitation and
organization among prisoners --
whose material conditions make them
an overwhelmingly revolutionary
group. Some prisoners should and will
work on self-criticism under a future
dictatorship of the proletariat in those
cases in which prisoners really did do
something wrong by proletarian
standards.

Under Lock & Key

News from Prisons & Prisoners

Indiana restricts
prisoner property

Greetings in peace and solidarity:
The reactionary forces that control the

Indiana State Prison (ISP) are continuing their
abuse against prisoners housed on the D-ALS
unit. Our fundamental and human right to

communicate, posses and receive information
is being threatened. On September 25, 2002
the entire unit was locked-down because of

an isolated fight between two knuckleheaded
inmates. During the lock-down our families
were denied the right to visit.

But it doesn't end there. The oppression

has gone a step further. They are now
implementing further repressive measures.

We are told that now we can only have the
following items:

1) Five personal books or magazines

2) No hardcover books
3) One ink pen without casing
4) One newspaper

5) 15 letters
6) Ten photos
7) 50 sheets of writing paper

8) 25 envelopes
9) $20 in stamps
This measure is not about an isolated fight

between two inmates-it's a retaliatory
response due to outside pressure being
brought against this prison by several state

representatives who are disgusted with the
persistent abuse being inflicted upon those
confined to D-ALS.

We have brought it up to those running this

prison that state law I.C. 11-11- 3-6 clearly
authorizes prisoners to receive books,

magazines, newspapers or other periodicals
as long as they come directly form a publisher,
distributor, bookstore, etc. This law does not

distinguish between hardback or soft-cover
books. So long as they come from a publisher
etc. Also, I.C. 11-11-5-4 prohibits the

restriction of our reading & writing materials
and visits as punitive discipline measures,
unless we abuse these rights, which is not the

case. We urge support to stop this crime
attempting to silence progressive
revolutionary voices!

Fax or Call:
Commissioner of the IDOC
Evelyn Ridley Turner

FAX (317) 232-6798
TEL (317) 232-5715
-A prisoner in Indiana, October 2002

Indiana phone scam

Wabash Valley Correctional Facility and

the Indiana DOC have found a way to profit

from their incarcerated offenders.

When an inmate arrives at WVVCF he

must turn in a phone list with the telephone

numbers of family, friends, and lawyers that
he wishes to call. After receiving the list,
WVCF will place a "Block" on certain

numbers. Here is how it goes:

When people contact WVCF about this

WVCF informs them that the person's

telephone company has some sort of long-
distance block on that person's phone line.
That person contacts their phone company

and finds out that WVCF was wrong. They
call Wabash again and WVCF offers the
person to be billed directly from Wabash.

Wabash offers to become their specific long-
distance carrier for calls from WVCF. They
rate may not be much different from that of a

regular carrier but the cost to the facility is
next to nil.

This allows the facility to play the

percentages game.

When you take that percentage and

multiply it by the 20K plus inmates in Indiana
prisons the IN DOC is bringing in a lot of
revenue by families just wanting to talk with

their loved ones. How can they say that the
IN DOC or the stat of Indiana is financially
short of funds when these types of dirty

capitalist tricks are used on unsuspecting
citizens.

Personally its taken me nearly 5 months for

me to able to call my mother. All the powers
that be-down here said it was not her phone
that was the problem. Her phone company

said that WVCF was the problem. I can call
home now and mom uses her phone company
instead of allowing the DOC to become rich

off our phone calls.

--A prisoner in Indiana, September 2002

MA pigs try to break
organized prisoners

The pig counselors here recently told me I

might be on the list to transfer out of this [max.
security prison] to [another prison]. But the

catch is that I must first go through and
complete the STG Renouncement Program.
Then I'll be on 2-year probation. If or when I

leave, I will let ya'll know ASAP. It could be
as soon as this year or early next year. But
whether or not they leave me here on

lockdown or let me go to population I will
persevere. To quote Uncle Ho:

Without the cold and desolation or winter

There can be no warmth or splendor of spring
without winter Hardships have tempered and
strengthened me And turned my mind to steel.

All they do when they keep me locked

down and be oppressive in any other way is
make me more serious in my convictions. I

laugh at their attempts to break me down.

On a brighter note, the beasts have finally

eased some of the restrictions that were

imposed on the "gang blocks" and the whole
max of [this prison]. They used to let us out
for rec. 5 times a week, twice outside in a

cage and 3 times on the tier, 1 hour each rec.
and they had a 45 cell unit divided into 15,
three man sectors. Now there are 4, five-man

sectors and we come out 7 days a week, 1
hour each day, 2 yard days and 5 tier rec's.
We still do not have direct access to the main

law library or general population. Two out of
the four "gang blocks" do have access to the
main law library. I believe that is because

those two blocks are not organized. It's a
mixed block while the two other blocks are
Latin Kings and Neta so we are more

restricted due to the fact that our blocks will
protest against their abusive oppressive tactics
in an organized fashion.

--a MA prisoner, October 2002

RAIL adds: STG, or so-called security

threat group, is a label given to supposed

gangs or organizations accused of posing a
threat to the security of individuals or the
prison institution. Often, as described above,

groups fighting the repression in the prison
are labeled gangs. Evidence for so- called
gang association may be no more than the fact

that a prisoner speaks Spanish or has a
particular tattoo. An STG label is used to
justify harsher incarceration conditions at

higher security levels. Often the STG label

results in long-term imprisonment in an

isolation unit.

Ho Chi Minh was part of the united front

against imperialism. However, he failed to

recognize the significance of the Cultural
Revolution and the importance of fighting
revisionism. For more on MIM's analysis of

Ho Chi Minh, see: http://www.etext.org/
P o l i t i c s / M I M / w i m / w y l /
hoandplp.txt

Fighting Censorship
at Attica

Revolutionary Greetings,
I received your correspondence dated 10/

11/02. I'm extremely grateful for the support
you will be giving me when and if I encounter
censorship battles here. I'm more than willing

and able to go to Federal Court in order to
get your much needed voice in here behind
these prison walls. When I received your letter

dated Oct 1st, 2002 I immediately wrote the
Deputy Superintendent of Programs inquiring
as to why my MIM Notes was being censored

and why the appeal mechanism wasn't being
enforced. Enclosed is both the letter and
response that I received. In essence they are

saying that for you to send the publications
to me and if all is well so be it. If they feel
there is any rule violations it will go in front

of media review (Dir #4572). Other than that
all is well. I'm doing my part, please start to
send MIM Notes to the above address.

--a New York Prisoner, October 2002

8 October 2002

Dep. Supt. of Programs R. Savage,

Mr. Savage, Hello how are you? Fine I pray.

I'm writing you because a problem has arisen
that I would like for you to address. I received

a letter from the Maoist Internationalist
Movement (MIM) publications dated Oct 1st,
2002. In the letter they explained after my

inquiry about my not receiving my
publications, that Attica Correctional Facility
is censoring and not allowing in MIM Notes.

They aren't even abiding by the guidelines
as set forth in DIR #4572 Media Review and
are sending back publications without any

appeal process. I would like to know why has
my MIM Notes been denied as set forth in
DIR #4572 so that I can activate the appeal

process as set forth in DIR 4572. I appreciate
your time and patience in this matter. I've
enclosed a copy of the letter for your

information. I hope to hear from you shortly.

--NY prisoner

Date: 22 October 2002

From: Media Review Committee, Attica

Correctional Facility

Edward O'Mara, Chairman

Deputy Superintendent Savage has asked

that I respond to your inquiry regarding a
publication entitled: MIM Notes.

The publication is subject to the same

provisions as any other publication, which
arrives at the Attica Correctional Facility. If

staff determines that there are possible
violations of Directive #4572, the publication
is to be sent to the Media Review Committee

for further scrutiny. All concerned employees
are aware of this regulation and this Facility
is in COMPLIANCE with the directive. There

have been no MIM Notes denied entry into
the facility by the Media Review Committee

in your name. The appeal process is always
an option when Directive 4572 is employed.

We hope that this clarifies this matter for

you.

MIM Campaign update: This letter is a

step forward in an ongoing struggle against

censorship in Attica that started a year ago.
With the help of comrades on the inside and
supporters on the outside we are ready to take

this campaign to the next level. This is the
first word from Attica we have received and
they have denied violating their Media

Review policies. However, MIM has
evidence of materials being rejected at Attica
addressed to other prisoners including MIM

Notes, books and personal letters. Generally
speaking other prisons in the state do follow
Directive #4572 and as a result most allow

our mail through, while others only censor
occasional materials while providing specific
explanations (which we argue against). Attica

has been the exception, just denying mail
across the board. Therefore we must pressure
Chairman O'Mara to stand by his word that

they will be in compliance with their own

MIM Notes 271 · December 1, 2002· Page 11

Facts on U$ imprisonment

The facts about imprisonment in the United $tates are that the United $tates has been the world's leading prison-state per capita for the last

25 years, with a brief exception during Boris Yeltsin's declaration of a state of emergency.(1)

That means that while Reagan was talking about a Soviet "evil empire" he was the head of a state that imprisoned more people per capita.

In supposedly "hard-line" Bulgaria of the Soviet bloc of the 1980s, the imprisonment rate was less than half that of the United $tates.(2,3)

To find a comparison with U.$. imprisonment of Black people, there is no statistic in any country that compares including apartheid South

Africa of the era before Mandela was president. The last situation remotely comparable to the situation today was under Stalin during war
time. The majority of prisoners are non-violent offenders(4) and the U.S. Government now holds about a half million more prisoners than
China; even though China is four times our population.(5)

The rednecks tell MIM that we live in a "free country." They live in an Orwellian 1984 situation where freedom is imprisonment.

Notes: 1. Marc Mauer, "Americans Behind Bars: The International Use of Incarceration 1993," The Prison Sentencing Project, 918 F. St. NW, Suite

501, Washington, DC 20004 (202) 628-0871 Reference: SRI: R8965-2, 1994
2. Ibid., 1992 report.

3. United Nations Development Programme, "Human Development Report 1994,:" Oxford University Press, p. 186.

4. Figure of 51.2 percent for state prisoners there for non-violent offenses. Abstract of the United States 1993, p. 211.
5. Atlantic Monthly December, 1998.

From the MIM "Frequently Asked

Questions" page, http://www.etext.org/
Politics/MIM/faq.

Internationalism is the ethical belief or

scientific approach in which peoples of
different nations are held to be or assumed to
be equal. Internationalism is opposed to
racism and national chauvinism.

We Maoists believe the nationalism of

nations experiencing oppression of
imperialism is "applied internationalism." We
oppose nationalism of oppressed nations
directed at other oppressed nations, because
the economic content of such nationalism is
intra-proletarian conflict. We seek a united
front of oppressed nations led by the
international proletariat against imperialism.

"I must argue, not from the point of view

of `my' country (for that is the argument of a
wretched, stupid, petty-bourgeois nationalist
who does not realize that he is only a plaything
in the hands of the imperialist bourgeoisie),
but from the point of view of my share in the
preparation, in the propaganda, and in the
acceleration of the world proletarian
revolution. That is what internationalism
means, and that is the duty of the
internationalist, of the revolutionary worker,
of the genuine Socialist."

V. I. Lenin, "What Is Internationalism?"

The Proletarian Revolution and the
Renegade Kautsky (Peking: Foreign
Language Press, 1965), p. 80.

What is internationalism?

regulations in which case we will be able to
regain contact with many revolutionary

comrades being held in Attica

We encourage those on the outside to write

Chairman Edward O'Mara and Deputy

Superintendent of Programs R. Savage at:
Attica Correctional Facility Box 149 Attica,
NY 14011-0149 and to cc: MIM with a copy

of your letter. Get in touch with MIM to
provide further legal or campaigning support
to this effort.

Censorship victory in
Tennessee

Dear MIM,
I received my magazine today. I got it the

same day it arrived here, they didn't give any
trouble. That's what they should've done the
first time. I feel good about the situation, I'm

glad MIM was there to help see it through.
That makes me know that when you struggle
for a cause and together, a change will take

place.

-- a prisoner in Tennessee, October 2002

MIM responds : We had to send the

magazine to this prisoner twice because the
first time the prison rejected it. On appeal the
prison administrator tried to claim MIM had

not sent anything to the prisoner. But after
being furnished with a photocopy of the
returned envelop he was forced to admit to

the censorship and allow the magazine in.
Many censorship cases in prison just require
persistence and the time to write protest

letters. We need help with these battles.
Contact us to get involved. And to view the
latest on prison censorship by state check out

http://www.prisoncensorship.info/archive/etext/prisons/
censor.html

Fighting the 3-Strike
law in California

There is no doubt that we are indisputably

under siege and definitely in a major state of
emergency. Fortunately we still have a

contingency of prison community, civil and
human rights organizations and activists
working in our behalf to abolish this racist

and oppressive 3-strike law that is targeting
the poor; people of color in general; and Black
males in particular.

However, we must bear in mind that these

outside groups, activists and organizational
heads are not our inside leaders, but are only

representatives of our collective plight,
struggle and body, and can only be as effective
as the body of which it represents. Therefore,

if we are inactive and/or ineffective in our
inside demonstrations and struggle for justice
and liberation, they in turn will be ineffective

representatives of our plight and struggle.

Therefore, we cannot afford this luxury of

just sitting around doing nothing and hoping

for everything. Political change does not

happen like that. There is serious work to be
done on all levels and our outside

representatives cannot do the job alone, nor
should they have to. We must organize and
formulate effective inside demonstrations that

will not undermine our overall objective or
jeopardize our outside representatives!

Therefore the National Plantation

Psychosis Awareness Committee and
Associates has initiated a class action group
appeal /832.5 citizens complaint against CDC

alleging the following:

CDC has implemented a general policy and

practice of double celling. This practice is

imposed upon inmates whether they are
willing or unwilling to comply. Consequently
the unwilling inmate is either coerced,

threatened or persuaded by disciplinary
actions to accept this aforementioned double
celling and therefore often creates a volatile,

hostile and all too often lethal living
environment for the inmates and has
consequently and dangerously placed all

single cells throughout CDC at over 198%
capacity.

In most instances, to cover up these

departmental threats and coercions of forced
double celling, inmates are made to sign get
along chronos which serve to relieve CDC of

any liability should the inmates injure one
another as a result of being forced into
cohabitating these one man designed cells,

thus lethal overcrowding conditions.

Petitioners agree with the supreme court

ruling that in itself "inmates contentions that

the close confinement of double celling-
housing, two inmates in a single cell - for long
periods creates a dangerous potential for

frustration, tension and violence, does not
lead to the conclusion that double celling...
is a cruel and unusual conditioning of

confinement in violation of the eight
amendment." Rhodes v. Chapman, 452 u.s.
337 at 70.

However, CDC's practice of "forcing"

double celling with threats and coercions after
the opposition of sharing a single cell quarter

has been explicitly expressed by either inmate
creates a volatile and gladiator type
environment for both inmates and thus

triggers an eighth amendment violation of
deliberate indifference to a substantiated risk
of serious harm, in that "the federal

constitution's eighth amendment does not
require a prisoner seeking a remedy for unsafe
conditions to await a tragic event, such as an

actual assault before seeking relief." Farmer
v. Brennan, 128 Led 2d 811, 815.

The aforementioned practice of "forced

double celling" not only negligently and
barbarically creates a penological interest of
safety and security rather than serves one, but

further serves to: 1. Arbitrarily make the 3-
strike law physically possible; 2. Arbitrarily
facilitate our own incarceration; and 3.

Camouflage the true magnitude of the 3-strike
law from the public.

Petitioners request that CDCs arbitrary

policy and practice of forcing and coercing

the double celling of unwilling inmates with
threats of disciplinary actions be rescinded
immediately.

The notification of this class action group

appeal/832.5 citizens complaint against CDC
is a preamble for the proceeding February 26,

2003 call to all 3- strikers, old lifers (7-ups),
supporters and sympathizers to mobilize
themselves throughout the state for a legal,

nonviolent mass demonstration of resisting
the policy and practice of forced double
celling under the auspice of the above appeal/

complaint.

We must utilize the time between now and

February 26, 2003 to educate and prepare our

collective body for the inevitable threats,
force of violence and other strategic
maneuvers the department of correction is

going to launch against us in an attempt to
extinguish this mass demonstration of
peaceful and legal resistance and to neutralize

our inside organizers and outside contacts.

Therefore we must stress the need to remain

focused, united, disciplined and committed

to the objective of our liberation and not be
distracted nor discouraged by the hardships
and strategic compromises that are surely to

come. This is a 3-strike backlash
demonstration with no side issues other than
the demand to provide the 7-lifers a release

date.

Common sense, simple economics and

ramification of safety and security issues and

codes dictates that the politicians and public
at large will be much more receptive to our
representatives demand to abolish this racist

and oppressive 3-strike law and provide dates
for the old 7-lifers, when CDC wakes up one
morning to discover its prison yards,

dayrooms, classrooms, workplaces, etc,
bursting at its seems with tents, sleeping bags,
cots and an immediate need of 50,000+

unavailable beds as a direct result of us simply
resisting CDCs arbitrary practice of forced
double celling.

This massive 3-strike backlash

demonstration across the state of California's
department of corrections will set in motion

the needed, real and substantial political
background that will give our outside
representatives and pursuing legal defense

teams the needed fuel and momentum to break
the states back and liberate us from this race/
poverty based oppression that affects us all.

Black, white, Mexican and others.

We have the needed numbers, power and

outside support. Therefore, the ultimate

power is in our hands. So now we must
mobilize and collectively make this 3-strike
back lash a permanent reality for CDC, the

governor and public.

Ignoring this appeal to mobilize and act will

in all likelihood cost us all the rest of our

natural lives and continue to drain our
communities of its most precious and valuable

resource, which is our youth.

Be involved! Make it happen! 3-strike

backlash. Starting February 26, 2003. Dare
to struggle, dare to win.

--founding president/minister of defense

of the National Plantation Psychosis
Awareness Committee (NPPAC), September
2002

MIM responds: We unite with this prisoners

call for protest against the 3- strike law in

California. This law has resulted in ridiculous
sentences for minor crimes and even greater
skyrocketing imprisonment rates in

California. On the CDC web site visitors can
browse the population of the prisons side- by-
side with information about the supposed

capacity of the prisons. Supporting this
prisoner's argument about double celling,
virtually all of the institutions are housing far

more prisoners than they had capacity for by
original design. Laws such as the 3-strikes
law directly impact the rate of imprisonment

but have no effect on the crime rate. The
skyrocketing numbers of people in prison in
the U.$. as a whole over the past 30 years

have shown no relationship with the crime
rate. Locking more people up, in increasingly
dangerous and repressive conditions, is only

serving the ends of social control and
repression of the oppressed nations.

MIM Notes 271 · December 1, 2002· Page 12

Notas Rojas

dec 1, 2002, Nº 271 Fragmento del Periodico Oficial del Movimiento Internacionalista Maoista

Gratis

¿Que es el MIM?

El Movimiento Internacionalista Maoísta (MIM) es un partido revolucionario

comunista que ejerce el Marxismo-Leninismo-Maoísmo. El MIM es una organización
internacionalista que trabaja desde el punto de vista del proletariado del Tercer Mundo;
es por esto que sus miembros no son amerikanos sino ciudadanos del mundo.

El MIM lucha para acabar con la opresión de todos los grupos sobre cualquier otro,

naciones por naciones, clases por clases, y géneros por géneros. La revolución es una
realidad para los Estados Unidos mientras su ejército continúa extendiendose en su
esfuerzo por asegurar la hegemonía mundial.

El MIM difiere de otros partidos en tres puntos basicos: (1) El MIM sostiene que

después que el proletariado conquiste el poder estatal, existira aún el potencial para una
restauración de tipo capitalista, bajo la dirección de una burguesía nueva dentro del
mismo partido comunista. En el caso de la Unión Soviética, la burguesía se apoderó del
gobierno después de la muerte de Stalin, en 1953; y en China después de la muerte de
Mao y del derrocamiento de la llamada "banda de los cuatro' en 1976. (2) El MIM
sostiene que la Revolución Cultural en China es la fase ms avanzada a la que llegó el
comunismo en la historia. (3) El MIM afirma que la clase trabajadora blanca de los
EE.UU. es primordialmente, una élite trabajadora no revolucionaria en el presente. Es
por esto que no es el principal vehículo para avanzar el Maoísmo en este país.

El MIM acepta como miembro a cualquier individuo que esté de acuerdo con estos

tres puntos basicos, y que acepte al centralismo democrtico, el método de gobierno por
la mayoría en lo que se refiere a cuestiones de línea del partido. El MIM es un partido
clandestino que no publica los nombres de sus miembros para evitar la represión estatal
dirigida históricamente contra los movimientos revolucionarios comunistas, y anti-
imperialistas. Si Ud. desea una suscripción para cualquiera de nuestros periódicos o
libros teóricos, en español o en inglés, por favor mandar dinero en efectivo o un cheque
al nombre de MIM a esta dirección:

MIM · P.O. Box 29670 · Los Angeles CA 90029-0670

El 13 de febrero, la Liga

Antiimperialista Revolucionara organizó

un foro en la Universidad de Berkeley al

que asistieron por lo menos 60 personas.

El evento se inició con una impactante

obra oral instigando a que la gente se

incorporara a la lucha por la humanidad.

Los discursos presentados por el

Movimiento Maoísta Internacionalista

(MIM), el Comité de los Derechos

Humanos de Filipinas (CDHF) y el

BAYAN de la bahía de San Francisco

fueron intercalados por presentaciones

musicales de la banda activista filipina

Diskarte Namin. Este foro importante

desencadenó en la universidad un

creciente movimiento de oposición al

imperialismo estadounidense en las

Filipinas. Los estudiantes expresaron su

intención de movilizar a la gente de la

Universidad de Berkeley mediante

campañas educativas y una actividad

política en solidaridad con la lucha del

pueblo filipino por su autodeterminación.

El orador del MIM inició el foro

mencionando que las 600 tropas

estadounidenses que habían sido

mandadas a las Filipinas mas 100

millones de dólares en ayuda militar

prometidos en enero, son las últimas

pruebas del dominio de EE.UU sobre las

Filipinas.

[La presencia de las tropas

estadounidenses en el territorio filipino

supuestamente se debe a la necesidad de

entrenar a las fuerzas militares filipinas

en su lucha contra la pandilla Aby Sayaaf

que, según EE.UU.¸ tiene conexiones a

Osama bin Laden. Sin embargo, según

un orador del CFHF, el mismo gobierno

filipino no piensa que los restantes 60

bandidos sean significantes. El

periodista Nocholas Kristof del periódico

yaqui New York Times que apenas podría

considerarse un antiimperialista radical,

sostiene que la presidenta filipina Gloria

Macapagal-Arroyo "aprovechó el

contexto del 11 de septiembre para hacer

pasar a Abu Sayyaf por terroristas

internacionales con fin de obtener más

ayuda militar de EE.UU." (1)] La

llamada "guerra contra el terrorismo"

sirve de pretexto para la actual invasión;

sin embargo, los mismos EE.UU. es una

organización terrorista, sin mencionar a

los gobiernos clientes de las Filipinas e

Israel. Según el Departamento de Estado

de EE.UU., la definición de terrorismo

incluye "el uso de agentes biológicos,

químicos o armas nucleares, armas de

fuego o explosivos con la intención de

poner en peligro, de una forma directa o

indirecta, la seguridad de una o más

personas o causar daño de carácter

considerable a la propiedad". (2)

Dentro de un contexto más global, el

orador del MIM además abordó varias

formas de participación de EE.UU en

asuntos interiores de otros países, lo cual

incluye tanto el colonialismo directo

como indirecto o neocolonialismo. Los

ejemplos dados variaban desde golpes de

estado contra gobiernos elegidos

democráticamente hasta apoyos

financieros y militares con fin de minar

a gobiernos populares y llevar a cabo

agresiones militares así como respaldar

a gobiernos títeres. Esta participación

militar y económica en asuntos interiores

de otros países es lo que llamamos

imperialismo- una etapa del capitalismo

que se caracteriza por un colonialismo,

un monopolio de corporaciones y una

exportación del capital al extranjero con

fines lucrativos. El ser una corporación

capitalista ejemplar significa importar

muchas ganancias mediante la fundación

de maquiladoras en países con un fácil

acceso a recursos naturales, donde las

tasas de salario son mínimas, donde no

existen leyes laborales ni tampoco

regulaciones sobre medio ambiente. El

orador del MIM señalo que el estándar

de vida en EE.UU. sobrepasa el del tercer

mundo de una forma significante a causa

de todas esas ganancias importadas. Sin

embargo, el MIM cree que ninguna

nación del mundo debería enriquecerse

a costo de otras naciones. Eso es lo que

se llama internacionalismo. El

internacionalismo se opone al racismo y

el chovinismo nacional. El

internacionalismo implica que los

ciudadanos de este país que se benefician

de la explotación y opresión de los

pueblos del mundo, tienen la

responsabilidad de respaldar las luchas

justas de los pueblos oprimidos por su

autodeterminación. El orador del MIM

rogó que el público pensara en cómo

podría manifestar su internacionalismo

mientras que escuchaba las

presentaciones sobre la situación en las

Filipinas. Los oradores del CDHF

esbozaron las causas de la intervención

yanqui en las Filipinas. Un orador habló

sobre la riqueza de recursos naturales y

la posición estratégica que convierten las

Filipinas en un blanco deseable. [Las

Filipinas están situadas en la parte sureste

del Océano Pacífico. Las islas fueron

utilizadas como un escenario estratégico

durante la guerra en Vietnam, lo cual

podría repetirse en el caso de que EE.UU.

lancen una guerra en contra de Corea,

China o el Sureste de Asia.] Además se

abordó la larga historia de gobiernos

lacayos que habían firmado tratados

cediendo a EE.UU. el derecho de ocupar

el territorio filipino con fin de

promocionar los intereses

estadounidenses, lo cual ha resultado en

una tremenda pobreza del pueblo filipino.

El orador del CDHF discutió el

movimiento nacional democrático de las

Filipinas que lucha por reformas agrarias,

una indusrialización nacional, una

liberación del dominio extranjero así

como cambios en el liderazgo del

gobierno. [El clandestino Partido

Comunista de las Filipinas que encabeza

esta lucha está llevando a cabo una guerra

popular con fin de derrocar al gobierno

reaccionario de la República de las

Filipinas y establecer una base para la

construcción del socialismo.]

Ha habido una respuesta fuerte a la

reciente invasión de las tropas

estadounidenses en las Filipinas. El 18

de enero, unos grupos democráticos

nacionales organizaron en Manila un

rally impresionante oponiéndose a la

presencia de las tropas estadounidenses

en el territorio filipino. [A finales de

enero, el Partido Comunista de las

Filipinas divulgó un comunicado

condemnando tanto "la descarada

intervención de tropas americanas en las

Filipinas como el carácter sinvergüenza

del régimen servil Macapagal-Arroyo".

"El Partido entero está determinado por

frustrar semejantes pasos y está listo para

encabezar la resistencia popular a la

intervención militar de EE.UU. en todas

las direcciones y mediante cualquier

recurso", dice el comunicado. "Está listo

para hacer que el régimen Macapagal-

Arroyo pague caro por su transparente y

absoluto papel de títere y su traición a la

patria".]

Todos los oradores señalaron que la

presente situación en las Filipinas es una

de emergencia. La gente muere por causa

del imperialismo yanqui. Esta última

invasión podría convertirse en una guerra

de agresión- una guerra contra el pueblo

filipino que está reclamando sus derechos

a la paz, comida, vivienda,

medicamentos, educación, cultura

nacional, independencia territorial y

autodeterminación. La gente debería

tener un derecho a la lucha armada para

la autodefensa, y eso es lo que han hecho

muchos. El movimiento revolucionaro

de las Filipinas que representa los

intereses de más de 90% de la población

ha tenido éxito y sigue creciendo. La

gente de EE.UU. tenemos la

responsabilidad de exigir que EE.UU.

aparte sus garras imperialistas de las

Filipinas.

Traducido por Células de Estudio para

la Liberación de Aztlán y América Latina

Bibliografía:

1. New York Times, 8 de febrero 2002.

2. www.state.gov/www/global/

terrorism/fto_info_1999.html.

El foro californiano sobre las Filipinas moviliza al

pueblo estadounidense bajo el lema "¡Fuera ahora!"