MIM Notes ***

MIM Notes 298 · March 15, 2004 · Page 1

MIM Notes

March 15, 2004, Nº 298

The Official Newsletter of the Maoist Internationalist Movement (MIM)

Free

INSIDE: Economy update * 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 #56365

BOSTON, MA

www.prisoncensorship.info/archive/etext/elections

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

WHAT KIND OF

DEMOCRACY

IS THIS?

Haiti is a perfect case of the lie in all

Amerikan "foreign policy" which is really

a system, not a policy. In April 2001,

President Bush spoke of all of the

Western Hemisphere except for Cuba as

"free" and "democratic." Proving that

"freedom" and "democracy" are just

covers that he uses, Bush overthrew the

democratically-elected Haitian

government of Jean-Bertrand Aristide on

February 29th.

The key facts are not in dispute by the

U.$. Government. As late as January 6th,

2004, the U.$. Government said that Haiti

had a democratically-elected government.

A press release harking back to a pivotal

FTAA (Free Trade Agreement of the

Americas) meeting read as follows: "In

April of 2001, the ITAL democratically

elected END leaders of the Hemisphere

gathered in Quebec City for the Third

Summit of the Americas [emphasis

added]."(1) Bush said the only exception

in the Western Hemisphere was Cuba.

Hence, Bush himself counted Haiti as

having a democratically elected

government and his February

smokescreen for overthrowing Aristide

was that Aristide resigned. The State

Department put it this way: "At President

Aristide's request, the United States

facilitated his safe departure from

Haiti."(2) Yet, Aristide called it

kidnapping: "Maxine Waters, a

Democratic congresswoman from Los

Angeles, said Mr. Aristide `told me he

had been kidnapped in a coup d'état.'"(3)

The clue is the State Department's opinion

that Aristide's departure: "resolves the

political impasse that is the root of the

violent unrest in Haiti in recent weeks."(2)

That's just the U.$. agenda speaking loud

and clear.

While Bush claims not to have had a

part in the 2004 violence that overthrew

Aristide and that is a deception, the

remaining facts are proof enough that

"democracy" is not the guiding light of

U.$. "foreign policy." It's quite in the open

that the United $tates had a role in picking

the next prime minister and the new

president. The fact that the United $tates

chose also to back replacing the prime

minister of Haiti Yvon Neptune proves

Aristide's contention that he did not resign

but the United $tates forced him out.(4)

A VOTE FOR

THE DONKEY

IS A VOTE FOR

AN ASS

So, you and some of his 700,000 website

followers gave Howard Dean $50 million

(1) and he lost New Hampshire's 2004

primary for the Democratic nomination

for president after spending most of it.

Judging by people who forked over

money, Dean had the support of a broader

mass of people than Kerry. Out of

candidates Bush, Edwards, Kerry,

Lieberman, Dean, Clark, Kucinich and

Sharpton, only Dean and Kucinich

received most of their money from people

giving less than $200 a piece.(2) Kerry,

Bush overthrows elected Haiti government

Lessons from the Democratic Party primaries

The choice is yours, Deaniacs:

The issues or the bullshit

Ralph Nader runs

for president again

On February 22, Ralph Nader

announced that he would run for U.S.

president via an independent bid requiring

1.5 million petition signatures to get on

the November 2004 ballot. Immediately

the ayatollahs of the two-party system

slammed Nader with slogans about how

a "vote for Nader is a vote for Bush."

In 2000, Nader ran as a Green Party

candidate and won 2.7% of the vote.

Many of those would not have voted at

all if not for Nader, but polling data

suggests that Nader cost Democratic

Party nominee Al Gore the electoral votes

of Florida and New Hampshire, and thus

the presidency. MIM accepts that as fact,

but we oppose the ayatollahs defending

the indefensible two-party system

anyway. We're sure the ayatollahs will

name us "communists for Bush."

For his part, Nader says that the same

polls show that his candidacy helps

Democrats running for Congress. If he

were not running and offering an

Edwards, Lieberman and Sharpton all

received less than 20% of their campaign

money that way. In fact, Bush and Kerry

both received exactly 12% of their money

that way. That's another way of saying

big money was on the side of Kerry and

Bush, but money from middle-class people

was on Dean's side.

Adding insult to injury, and as suggested

by the breadth of your monetary support,

you Deaniacs outnumbered Kerry's

volunteers in Iowa and New Hampshire

According to bourgeois newswire

service Associated Press, Miami, Florida

nurses Gaile Loperfido and Dianne

Demeritte face third-degree murder and

manslaughter charges for failing to treat

a 17 year-old

prisoner at a

juvenile jail who

died after

complaining of

stomach pain.

Three top

officials also lost

their jobs.(1)

Another 11 lost

their jobs later.(2) If Associated Press has

reported the details correctly, MIM salutes

the actions taken in Miami and hopes

Miami remains consistent and thorough.

The persyn firing the pigs said: "`The

fact is: an adult human being, a caring

human being, a responsible human being

would not sit there while a child was

vomiting, had diarrhea, was sweating and

was in and out of consciousness, and not

take some action.'"(2)

Over a period of days, Omar Paisley

complained and complained of stomach

pain and requested medical assistance

It's about time: Murder charges

against fascist prison officials

Continued on page 6...

Continued on page 8...

Continued on page 4...

MIM Notes 298 · March 15, 2004 · Page 2

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

Letters

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

Notes is the official Party voice; more complete statements are published in our journal,
MIM Theory. Material in MIM Notes is the Party's position unless noted. MIM Notes
accepts submissions and critiques from anyone. The editors reserve the right to edit
submissions unless permission is specifically denied by the author; submissions are
published anonymously unless authors insist on identification (prisoners are never
identified by name). 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. The Revolutionary Anti-Imperialist League (RAIL) is an anti-
imperialist mass organization led by MIM (RCs are RAIL Comrades). MIM's ten-point
program is available to anyone who sends in a SASE.

The paper is free to all prisoners, as long as they write to us every 90 days to confirm

their subsciptions. There are no individual subscriptions for people outside prison.

People who want to receive newspapers should become sponsors and distributors.

Sponsors pay for papers, distributors get them onto the streets, and officers do both
distribution and financial support. Annual cost is: 12 copies (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. To become a sponor or distributor, send
anonymous money orders payable to "MIM." Send to MIM, attn: Camb. branch, PO Box
400559, Cambridge, MA 02140. Or write mim3@mim.org.

Most back issues of MIM Notes are available free on our web site. The web site con-

tains thousands of documents, with ordering information for many more.

MIM grants explicit permission to copy all or part of this newspaper for any reason, as

long as we are credited.

For general correspondence, contact:

MIM

P.O. Box 29670

Los Angeles, CA 90029-0670

eMail: <mim@mim.org>

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

Has MIM gone off the
deep end?

Dear MIM,

I met a couple of your comrades at the

demo in Washington yesterday and pick

up a copy of MIM Notes. First off let me

say that I haven't read much of it yet, but

just looking at the small bit on page 2

where you call for MIM Notes sponsors

and distributors, I have say that it seems

as though you have gone off the deep

end.

I always thought that the whole point

of the "labor aristocracy" theory was that

it doesn't really matter whether or not an

Amerikan was a liberal or conservative

or even in some cases a socialist or

communist, they all ultimately support

imperialism because they benefit from

this system. You intimate it this segment

that only "knee-jerk patriots who believe

everything Bush says" support

imperialism. The fact is that the vast

majority of Amerikans support imperialism

(including the vast majority who were in

D.C yesterday).

Look I'm a simple person who is not

extraordinarily intelligent in anyway. I am

not a great scholar of Marxist-Leninist

theory or any economic theory for that

matter. But [...] it seems to me that this

whole thing is incredibly simple. The

capitalists need consumers to buy all of

their products. If everyone was poor, no

one could afford to buy anything to make

the capitalist's profits. Therefore, it is

imperative in order for capitalism to work

to have a vast consumer class who live

very well under capitalism/imperialism

and therefore support it. It is equally

important for the capitalists to have vast

regions of the world where they may find

cheap labor and resources. So you see

the vast majority of people in the "Third

World" suffering miserably and the vast

majority in the "First World" enjoying

themselves. As William Blake wrote:

"Some are born to sweet delight, some

are born to endless night."

So just who are the "patriots and

internationalists" who are going to support

MIM so as to "undo the spectacle that

Uncle Sam is creating for its own

benefit"? I really thought that we agreed

that when the imperialists fight wars it

benefits the majority of Amerikans not

just "Uncle Sam". The majority of people

here who oppose the current imperialists'

war(s), do so because they are 1

concerned about "our troops" and/or 2

they don't want to kill third world people

outright. As long as the U.N sanctions all

of the pro-imperialist rulers of "under

developed" countries who starve their

own people, most everyone here is happy.

If I am missing something here

PLEASE educate me. [...]

In Struggle,

Confused and upset

mim@mim.org responds: We have

not changed our line on the white working

class. Taken as a whole, our articles on

the war on Iraq lampoon both the Bush-

is-right authority lovers and point out that

the majority showing up to rallies in the

heyday of the anti-war movement were

Jenny-come-latelies, there more to

oppose Bush (in support of the Dems)

than oppose imperialism. Check this out,

from our review of an April 12, 2003 rally:

We do not want to give people the

impression that all is good at anti-war

rallies in the united $tates. Of course,

we appreciate each and every non-

cop persyn at the rally, but there were

a number of indications of

complacency at the rally. As usual,

there were people at the rally

completely empty-handed, by which

we mean that they did not accept

any literature from anyone. Among

the most common excuses were "I

don't have any hands." The best

excuse for the day why the

demonstrator did not want a copy of

MIM Notes was: "too big, too much

to read. If it was smaller, I'd take it."

"There are two reasons that people

might not engage in struggle and read

other people's literature at rallies.

One is that s/he thinks s/he knows

everything and need not go further.

Another is that s/he is only at the rally

to salve a conscience momentarily

before returning to apolitical life. We

have heard many say that the war

was evil, so "I had to do something."

Iraqis defending themselves waited

for months for the Amerikkkans to

come. When the Amerikkkans

arrived in Iraq, many Iraqis waited

yet another week or two for the

Amerikkkans to come to their locale

for a chance to fight. Unfortunately,

the way that Amerikkkans "fight,"

thousands of Iraqis died from

bombing without ever seeing any

Amerikkkans. Our point in this is that

Amerikans still have comfort to

retreat to: that's why we insist that

the peace movement not just relieve

its conscience but fight to win. To

fight to win involves training the mind

and body and delivering a long-term

and time-consuming commitment.

Or this, from an article in MIM Notes

281:

There is an urgent problem and

question facing the global anti-war

movement. Although the world is

more than 80% opposed to the U.$.

war on Iraq, that is not the case in a

handful of countries.

The question arises, which

countries are they and why. From the

beginning, the United $tates had the

support of the majority of only one

country--I$rael.(1) Unfortunately,

there are others as well who are

phony in their opposition. England was

never very strong in its opposition,

never reaching the levels of opposition

in say Hungary, where more than

80% oppose the war even if the UN

would have endorsed it. As we go

into war, Tony Blair's government did

not fall despite the Labor Party's hold

on power, and not the Conservative

Party's. In fact, the English labor

aristocracy swung into action for war,

and the English public favored war

by a 54 to 30% margin once the war

started.(2) The rapid shift in opinion

is a clue to all scientific Marxists that

we are talking about a petty-

bourgeois population in its entirety.

Such a quick shift is not possible any

other way.

We've been careful to stress to our

readers--especially those jazzed by the

numbers at these rallies (which have

Continued on page 4...

MIM Notes 298 · March 15, 2004 · Page 3

by MC12

There are good reasons for everyone

in the U$A to oppose imperialism. As we

report in every issue of MIM Notes, we

are all threatened by the militarism and

war-mongering of the Amerikan

imperialists and their government--and

by the degradation of the environment.

And of course, for people with a

conscience, imperialism is a scourge

because the exploitation it wreaks across

the globe causes murder, mayhem and

malnutrition (among other crimes),

affecting billions of people.

Despite all this, some would-be

revolutionaries are always trying to

convince Amerikans to go along with their

so-called progressive agenda by telling

them that imperialism is making us all

poorer and poorer, except for a tiny group

of rich white men. This message is so

obviously factually untrue that few people

go along with it--except others who join

in the fallacy, thinking it might be useful

for mobilizing the broad public.

In contrast, MIM doesn't think it's

worthwhile to try to recruit people by lying

to them about the facts. As we show

below, we are not afraid to admit that,

even for Blacks and Latinos, incomes are

higher now than they were 30 years

ago--and that even holds for the poorest

fifth of each population.

Table 1 shows the average income for

the White, Black and Latino households

for 1973, 2000 and 2001, breaking each

group into income quintiles, or fifths of

the population (then further showing the

incomes for the top 5% of households).

We start in 1973 because that was the

peak economic year before stagnation hit

the U$ economy and wages stopped

growing after the post-WWII boom

(more on wages below). We show 2000

because that was the peak at the end of

the 1990s growth cycle. And we finish

with 2001 to show the effects of the most

recent recession.

The table helps correct three common

U.$. population still richer than ever

Imperialism threatens everyone--but not by making U.$. population poorer

myths. The first and most preposterous

is that everyone but the smallest minority

has been getting poorer. *Every*

segment of each group had greater

household incomes 30 years after the end

of the post-WWII boom. The second is

closer to the truth but still inaccurate--

that the poorest fifth of the population is

poorer than they used to be. Even among

the poorest fifth, incomes have grown.

The last one is a recurring myth--that

the most recent recession has wiped out

the previous gains. Although the last

recession did hurt incomes for almost

everyone, no group was bumped down

more than they gained in the previous 27

years.

Of course, the table does show

increasing income inequality, which is a

clear trend for the whole period: the

incomes of the rich have increased much

faster than those of the relatively poor,

and the most recent recession hurt the

bottom much more than the top. But the

absolute level of income is still higher than

in was in 1973. It also shows very large

income gaps between whites, Blacks and

Latinos, the result of national oppression

and colonialism, ongoing racism, and

some exploitation.

We should head off a few counter-

arguments and clear up a few problems

with the data. First, this being U.$.

Census data, we don't get to choose the

categories. So, "Whites" here includes

some people classified as "Hispanic"

(which we call "Latino" on the table). In

practice that just means the results for

Whites are really a little better than we

see here. And, "Black" households

include a small number of immigrants

who are "black" by "race" but not

necessarily yet members of the Black

nation in the U$A. Finally, the group we

call "Latino" here includes people from

many nationalities, from more poor

populations like Mexicans to richer

groups like Cubans, and we can't

differentiate them here.

More substantively, many people will

argue that this masks an important change:

the increasing employment of women.

These critics will argue that if household

incomes are rising, it's just because more

and more women are being "forced" into

the workplace just to keep their households

afloat.

MIM counters this in three ways. First,

if more women are employed now than

before, that's good news for them. If they

are making money and buying goods and

services they used to make at home, that's

empowering for them. So if their incomes

are rising as a result, that's not a distortion

of the truth--that's just the truth.

Second, even if you just look at

individual wages (as if families don't share

their incomes), they also rose from 1973

to 2000. The median income of all

workers--white, Black, male, female,

full-time year-round workers and those

who worked less--are all higher in 2000

than they were in 1973.(2) True, incomes

were stagnant for individual men from

1973 to 1993, but they rose sharply in the

1990s, and didn't lose all their gains in the

most recent recession.

Finally, note that the table here is

household income, not per capita income.

In fact, the number of people in the

average household has dropped during

this time--because people are getting

married later, are more likely to divorce,

and are having fewer children. We don't

know the exact change for each of the

groups in the table, but the average number

of people in households overall dropped

from 3.01 to 2.58 during this period.(3)

So if you converted the table to per capita

income, the gains would be even greater.

There is one other set of arguments that

is harder to test, but is not so off-base.

That is: because some things are much

more expensive than they used to be--

--------------------------------------------------------------

Table 1. Average household income by income quintile and top 5%,

1973-2001, in 2001 dollars.(1)

--------------------------------------------------------------

73-00 00-01

Percent Percent

1973 2000 Change 2001 Change

--------------------------------------------------------------

White

Bottom 9,567 11,394 19.1 11,118 -2.4

Second 23,571 27,492 16.6 26,985 -1.8

Middle 37,617 45,487 20.9 44,628 -1.9

Fourth 53,306 69,924 31.2 69,254 -1.0

Top 93,919 150,374 60.1 150,576 .1

Top 5% 143,364 267,458 86.6 269,162 .6

Black

Bottom 5,681 6,558 15.4 5,951 -9.3

Second 13,056 17,624 35.0 16,820 -4.6

Middle 22,187 31,218 40.7 29,477 -5.6

Fourth 34,839 49,023 40.7 47,424 -3.3

Top 63,201 101,502 60.6 96,569 -4.9

Top 5% 92,259 167,397 81.4 155,104 -7.3

Latino

Bottom 8,435 9,251 9.7 8,822 -4.6

Second 18,377 21,322 16.0 20,854 -2.2

Middle 28,189 34,318 21.7 33,624 -2.0

Fourth 40,765 51,859 27.2 51,459 -.8

Top 69,202 101,220 46.3 107,158 5.9

Top 5% 99,010 164,990 66.6 182,145 10.4

--------------------------------------------------------------

especially housing and health care--those

at the bottom are having a harder time

surviving even if they have more cash.

The numbers we show here are adjusted

for inflation, which takes into account the

growing cost of these necessities, but the

adjustments might be skewed for people

at the top and bottom of the income

distribution. We doubt that these

distortions are enough to eliminate the

gains shown here (and in some cases

those greater costs are associated with

higher quality, as in the case of some health

care improvements), but we would

welcome arguments on this question by

people who have relevant data.

In any event, we're confident that for

the top 80% of the population, and

probably even for the poorest fifth, they

are better off now than they were at the

economic peak of the Amerikan empire

in 1973. This does *not* mean that

imperialism is good, of course, because

this continued enrichment has come at

the expense of the suffering of billions of

people in the international proletariat. This

is the bottom line politically, and it's what

everyone trying to organize against

Amerikan imperialism needs to

understand if they are going to make any

real progress.

Notes:
1. Calculated from historical income tables from
the U.S. Census Bureau, at http://
www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/
ineqtoc.html.
2. Calculated from historical income tables from
the U.S. Census Bureau, at http://
www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/
incperdet.html.
3. Historical household composition tables from
the U.S. Census Bureau at http://
www.census.gov/population/socdemo/hh-fam/
tabHH-4.xls.

Tough times for Amerika.

MIM Notes 298 · March 15, 2004 · Page 4

alternative, some voters would stay home,

but once they show up and vote for Nader

they also vote for Democrats in the

Congress. That is also factually true,

given the nature of the mushy liberals and

liberal-radicals.

Finally, no one has pointed out that it is

possible to consider Nader as specifically

opposing Bush among the bourgeois

candidates available by serving as an

insurance policy. In this day of Anita Hill

and Monica Lewinsky or worse, no one

can guarantee that John Kerry or John

Edwards would not implode between the

time of winning the Democratic

nomination and the election in November.

The two-party system is just one scandal

away from giving Bush a lock on the

presidency.

Ross Perot showed that it is not

impossible for an independent to win

when polls showed the public disgusted

with both Bush and Clinton before Perot

himself imploded in the 1992 campaign.

Of course, Perot had a billion dollars that

Nader does not, so Nader's chances rest

on dual candidate implosions.

Neither party tolerable

In announcing his run, Nader said,

"`Washington is corporate-occupied

territory, and the two parties are

ferociously competing to see who's going

to go to the White House and take orders

from their corporate paymasters.'"(1)

Truer words have not been spoken, but

MIM still disagrees with Nader, for among

other reasons his protectionist economic

views about keeping jobs in Amerika,

which he recently aired on a television

talk show with Bill Maher.(2) The

international proletariat as a global class

has no interest in whether jobs are in

Amerika or elsewhere. We should not

promote people like Ralph Nader, Patrick

Buchanan, Ross Perot, John Edwards and

Dennis Kucinich who whip up public

opinion and call for government action

against the non-Amerikan proletariat.

World War I and World War II happened

because such views became popular in

Europe.

The one with the catchy Amerika-first

slogan lately is Kucinich campaigning in

the Democratic primaries with "Buy

American or bye-bye America!" He

came in second in Hawaii after John

Kerry. Kucinich's slogan shows that he

has bought into capitalist competition and

sees nothing wrong with stoking up

nationalism as part of that system. That's

why we at MIM insist we are for a global

minimum wage, global child labor

regulations and global environmental

protection. The alternative is the kind of

hostility toward other countries we see

with Kucinich.

In any case, the Nader campaign this

year raises the whole question of the two-

party system. If there were two parties

both opposed to exploitation, then a two-

party system would be no threat to the

dictatorship of the proletariat--though

campaigns where there are too many

candidates for too few jobs inevitably

promote opportunist grand-standing, an

evil in its own right from the standpoint

of publicizing truth. In fact, neither party

in the United $tates is tolerable and hence

the two-party system is not sacred.

Voters should decide whether they can

really tolerate the Democratic Party after

its leaders showed so freshly what war-

mongers they are. Kerry, Edwards,

Lieberman and Gephardt all voted for the

Iraq war. They also issued ridiculous

statements on Al-Qaeda and weapons of

mass destruction since proven false.

These men with official titles of power

proved unable to do anything constructive

with the truth if they perceived it at all--

and this is no small lesson on why

politicians are not a substitute for

movements. For us at MIM, the war and

colonialism questions are not just small

issues about equivalent with whether the

government should intervene in steroid

use in professional sports--though it

remains to be seen which "issue" will

drive more petty-bourgeois voters in 2004.

The two-party system encourages

people to think that nothing is intolerable.

War itself is seen as secondary to the

sanctity of the two-party system and that

is wrong.

Then there are those who say that the

Democrats know better than how they

vote in Congress--for the Patriot Act and

for the war's intensification in Iraq. These

Pollyannas consider it wisdom to mince

words for political purposes and support

politicians who also waffle at best. Not

surprisingly, such "moderates" foregoing

the work of movements to indulge lazy

self-satisfaction with professional

politicians pave the way for a race to the

bottom--a vicious cycle of reaction.

Yet, even this whole issue raised by self-

flattering lazy "moderates" is a big

diversion. No Democrat can really claim

to oppose any Republican for the simple

reason that the two-party system is

dedicated to alternating power. If not

George Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald

Rumsfeld and Richard Perle today, then

the two-party system guarantees them or

their like later. That's just what happened:

Rumsfeld served under President Ford.

Then came Carter. Eventually it was

Bush Jr. and Rumsfeld was back in

charge again.

It's not enough to say that the

Confederate flag fans and anti-Darwin

activists of the Republican Party are not

Democrats. The question is whether it is

OK to alternate power with such people.

If you think so, welcome to the

Republocrat Party. If not, then identify

yourself as a revolutionary leader, because

politicians have no power to change the

reality of the Republocrat Party.

Democrats not serious

The Boston Globe is screaming at Ralph

Nader and typifies the whole problem of

the two-party system's ayatollahs.

Opposing Nader just before and after he

announced his intentions, the Globe ran

editorials and letters opposing Nader's

campaign and one letter supporting it with

a line intimating that the writer is

Republican.(3) Yet, Massachusetts and

Boston in particular are proof that

Democrats are not really opposed to Bush

or Republicans generally.

Ever since Massachusetts voted for

Democrat George McGovern in 1972,

Massachusetts has stood out as

Democratic Party territory. Every single

member of the Massachusetts delegation

to the U.S. Congress is a Democrat. That

means Democrats are majority voters of

every district of Massachusetts. The

Democrats run the legislature and

override the governor if the petty-

bourgeoisie elects a Republican--and the

only reason the petty-bourgeoisie elects

a Republican in Massachusetts is to

attack inevitable corruption, sometimes

out of reflexive fear of the one-party state.

The simple truth is that if

Massachusetts Democrats would split in

half, with one half forming what used to

be Nader's Green Party and the other

half staying Democrats, the two halves

of the Democratic Party would each have

more votes than the Republican Party,

which might fade into oblivion. That is

how to hate Republicans in practice.

Instead of alternating power in the

governor's mansion with a Mormon

opposed to gay marriage such as Mitt

Romney, the Democrats could alternate

power with Greens.

Instead of contending with a Republican

for mayor or Congress races, Democrats

in Massachusetts could contend with

Greens and alternate power with them.

In no small part thanks to two-party

system dogma, the Democrats choose not

to alternate power with Greens and so

places like Democrat-dominated

Massachusetts and San Francisco prove

that no Democrat is really opposed to

Bush. The reason for that is that

Massachusetts Democrats like

Democrats elsewhere prefer Republicans

to Greens. They prefer Bush to Nader or

Romney to Jill Stein [Green Party

candidate for governor]. That's the

bottom line and until the Democrats in

the one-party states and cities split in two,

they have no business claiming they have

removed people like Bush from power.

That's why a vote for Gore is a vote for

Bush--as inevitably as scandal and

corruption. That's to leave aside the whole

issue of the substance of what the Greens

are saying and look only at an analysis of

power and who is sharing it and treating

it as legitimate.

The Democrats are busy "building

bridges" to the Howard Dean faction and

Greens to keep them in the fold for

November 2004. If they were serious, the

Massachusetts Democrats would have

deliberately split themselves in half and

made a deal with the Greens to alternate

power with them instead of

Republicans--and they would have done

it a long time ago.

At MIM, we realize that the imperialist

country petty-bourgeoisie is going to try

Ralph Naders and Greens before it tries

Maoism. We hope to contribute to the

public's understanding of political power

as it exists and cut through the

Democratic rhetoric about opposing

Bush. Power for change does not come

by taking a few seconds to vote and

months of time adjusting to the ideology

of "moderation." Power for change

comes from obtaining the truth and

spreading it.

Notes:

1. Boston Globe 23Feb2004, p. 1.

2. Bill Maher claims to have voted for

Nader in 2000 and now repents. http://

msnbc.msn.com/id/4356213/

3. See anti-Nader letters Boston Globe

26Feb2004, p. a14. There were two

column inches defending Nader by a

Dean supporter on the Boston Globe

letters page as opposed to 20 column

inches opposing Nader, 25Feb2004, pp.

a18-9.

A VOTE FOR THE DONKEY IS A VOTE FOR AN ASS

already drastically levelled off)--that the

mood at few protests in big coastal cities

is not indicative of the mood of the

majority of Amerikans. Yet at the same

time, the fact that many attendees are

newbies creates an opportunity for us to

make our case for revolutionary anti-

imperialism vs. reformism or electoralism

to fresh faces. Our hope is that some (not

all, of course, nor even a majority--our

line on the WWC makes that clear) will

be moved towards the revolutionary

camp.

Reader questions dead
prez review

In your CD review of [hip-hop group

Dead Prez'] "Get Free or Die Tryin" [the

last CD on http://www.etext.org/Politics/

M I M / b o o k s t o r e / m u s i c / h i p h o p /

deadprez.html], you mention all the good

tracks. What about the "Animal in Man"

(Animal Farm) track? Isn't this a rap

version of MI6 agent Orwell's anti-

'Stalinist' fairy tale? Does DP hate any

political system where whites hold power

so much that they don't uphold Stalin but

do uphold Mao (who is practically the

same in the eyes of counter-

revolutionaries) and the BPP? What's up

with that? Have they gone with Orwell,

skirted the issue, or changed it to their

perspective? Given that you criticized DP

hypocrisy on gender in your review, I

would appreciate some commentary of

MIM's opinion of the content and

inclusion of that track.

mim@mim.org responds : Here is

what the persyn who wrote that DPz

review had to say:

"I believe the content of this track is

appropriating the Animal Farm story from

the perspective of the oppressed. To my

knowledge DPz has no line on Stalin, and

I have no reason to believe they wrote

Letters

Continued from page 1...

Continued from page 2...

Continued on next page...

MIM Notes 298 · March 15, 2004 · Page 5

In the U.$. political system, if judges

do not stand up for minority rights,

democracy will kill those rights. When four

brave Massachusetts judges did the right

thing and said gays/lesbians could marry,

because it was an example of a

constitutional right guaranteed to all

individuals, the response of religion-

encrusted feeble minds everywhere was

to call for a statewide referendum,

because a majority of Massachusetts

voters oppose gay marriage.

Legislators also called a constitutional

convention for Massachusetts to amend

the constitution to prohibit gay/lesbian

marriage. The convention recessed at the

end of February and will resume on

March 11. Even if the legislators vote to

pass an amendment, it will not get to the

voters until 2006 at the earliest.

So let's see, here in Amerikkka, we can

sell tobacco without majority support; we

can set up pornographic websites without

majority support; we can instigate other

countries to buy weapons from

companies we set up without majority

support. We can even buy and sell the

right to pollute air as certified by U.$.

government regulations; yet, we need

permission from the majority to get

married.

When are those same four judges going

to declare a right to eat, have clothing,

have a job and live without war risks

concocted by politicians serving

corporate paymasters, we wonder. In

many ways, communism is just a very

tough and thorough conception of minority

rights. No one has the right to live a life

that endangers other people's lives more

than the minimum. Profit from drugs,

arms and pornography should not be an

individual right. Individual profit from

owning farmland and the means of food

or clothing production is obscene.

Gay/lesbian sex is not obscene. The

that song with the USSR in mind.

"The `Animal in Man' referred to by

the song is the willingness of the

oppressed to stand up violently to the

oppressor. The plot of the song definitely

describes a mass uprising that is turned

on by the leadership. But in the song the

masses immediately recgnize this and cut

off the new oppressors just as quickly.

My interpretation is that the masses will

rise up against all oppressors, both the

blatant and those posing as leaders of the

oppressed.

"The lesson of the story? violence is

necessary/inevitable/justified. I see no

evidence that DPz was making any of

the points that Orwell was. The only

general parallel to Animal Farm is that

the pigs turn on the other animals."

I will add that *in general* (with no

specific reference to DPz--I haven't

heard "the animal in man" in several

years), when "Animal Farm" ends up in

contemporary pop culture it usually refers

to the idea that "absolute power corrupts

absolutely." This is a naive idea,

dangerous in its own right (see our

comments on "Sleep Now in the Fire" in

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

bookstore/music/alternative/ratm.html)--

but does not imply a worked-out line

against Stalin.

Reader gives MIM
grief for stance on
patriarchy, imperialism

I am questioning your page with the title,

"All Sex is Rape". If heterosexuality is

an institution of oppression why have you

not taken the perspective that European

culture is a racist institution?

mim@mim.org replies: When we say

Liberalism runs out of steam:

Tyranny of the majority runs amok

individual right to marry should be upheld

while other individual rights should go by

the wayside. When two gay/lesbian

people marry right now, they raise the

quality of life of everyone; yet it is the

individual right to marry in question, not

the individual right to profit from others'

death. It's an example of Amerikkka's

screwed up priorities.

In response to this political calculus,

there are gay/lesbian activists buying into

the Amerikkkan view of itself. When San

Francisco's mayor Gavin Newsom said

the existing state laws were basically

baloney and started issuing same-sex

marriage licenses in February, one lobbyist

type from the Massachusetts Gay and

Lesbian Political Caucus said, "`And it

arguably made things worse here.'" MIM

would like to say that this sort of

calculation that San Francisco's ignoring

California state law would set off a

backlash is wrong in principle. Politicians

make that sort of calculation, but in

Amerikkka, the only language for this is

one of minority rights, and that cannot be

voided by a California state law.

It's up to judges to decide, not the

majority expressing its will through

referenda or politicians, and if judges

decide the wrong way, the minority should

keep on fighting, outside the law if need

be. The minority is its own best guarantee

for rights. That may sound like a truism,

but something we heard repeatedly during

the struggle in Massachusetts is that the

proposed constitutional amendment would

shame Lincoln and write discrimination

into the Constitution "for the first time."

It shows what weak readers Amerikans

are. Section IX of Article I protected slave

importation until at least the year 1808. A

piece of paper can never guarantee

anyone's rights.

"all sex is rape" we do not exclude

homosexual sex. Homosexual

relationships are also influenced by the

patriarchal milieu, which sexualizes

power inequalities. Problems of domestic

violence plague lesbian and gay

relationships as well as heterosexual. In

fact, the FAQ page you quote says it is a

*misunderstanding* of both MIM and

bourgeois legal theory to say that same-

sex rape is not rape.

That said, heterosexism is an institution

of oppression (and gets in the way of

overturning rape culture) when it pretends

that homosexual relationships are

qualitatively different ("evil" or "sick")

than heterosexual and discriminates

against homosexuals--while ignoring all

the problems in heterosexual relationships.

The opponents of gay marriage who say

gays threatens the institution of marriage

are ridiculous: breeders are doing that very

well on their own thank you very much,

what with the cheating and domestic

violence and divorce and bitter, often

violent child-custody battles.

As for European culture: have you read

other pages on our site, or our

newspaper? Imperialist-nation culture,

including European and Kanadian and

Amerikan culture, is indeed chauvinist

("racist"), in that it values imperialist-

nation (generally but not always "white")

lives above oppressed-nation lives.

Check out:

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

wim/threepoints.html

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

hategrp.html

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

elections/kerry2004.html

Or any issue of MIM Notes: http://

www.prisoncensorship.info/archive/etext/mn

LETTERS: From previous page...

Los Angeles, 28 Feb 2004

by mim108@mim.org

Several hundred immigrants and their

supporters held a march and rally in

downtown Los Angeles today, demanding

equal rights, an amnesty and drivers'

licenses for undocumented immigrants.

MIM and RAIL joined the rally,

distributing many copies of MIM Notes

and Notas Rojas, and collecting signatures

for our petitions against Control Units in

California prisons and the new Patriot Act.

(For more information on these

campaigns, visit http://www.etext.org/

Politics/MIM/agitation.)

Most of the signs and banners at the

rally demanded rights for immigrants

based on their contributions to the

economy as taxpayers and workers.

Others reminded the public that "the

Pilgrims were immigrants, too" and that

"immigrants made America." Still others

demanded access to "our American

dream." It is typical of some immigrants'

rights activists to play this patriotic card

to gain public support. And these

demands--drivers' licenses and an

amnesty--are certainly justified.

However, it is ultimately backward to

demand the extension of Amerikan

privilege to greater populations, since this

privilege comes at the expense of the

exploited workers of the Third World.

At the same time, we were glad to note

that many participants were receptive to

anti-Amerikan, communist literature,

taking many copies of our newspapers

and flyers, and signing petitions criticizing

the government on broad issues of state

repression. We believe there is substantial

anti-Amerikan potential among

immigrants who have been exposed to

such extreme state repression and racism

in the U$.

A substantial Trotskyist contingent was

on hand, distributing the "Socialist

Worker" newspaper, which tries to paper

over the conflicting interests of Amerika's

labor aristocracy and the international

proletariat.

One organizer, giving his troops a pep-

talk, used the phrase "borders are for

bosses." MIM agrees that imperialist

borders are good for the ruling class, and

throwing open the borders is a crucial

demand for communists. But let's not

pretend that the border with Mexico

doesn't also protect the privileged position

of Amerika's workers by keeping down

the number of workers eligible to compete

with them. Plus, the undocumented status

of many migrants relegates them to low-

paid jobs at the bottom of the labor market,

further insulating the rich workers of

Amerika. That is why undocumented

workers are among the only truly

exploited workers in the U$A--meaning,

they are paid less than the value of their

labor, unlike the parasitic "workers" who

reap some of the benefits of the

imperialist system, assuring their

allegiance to the oppressor nation and its

rulers.

Immigrants demand

equal rights

MIM Notes 298 · March 15, 2004 · Page 6

more than 100 to 1, but Kerry still won.

The Boston Globe even insulted your taste

in television ads, as if you should have

known that network TV still rules--not

Internet bloggers and snot-nosed kids

campaigning on snowy streets. Perhaps

most sleazy of all was the Boston Globe

poll just before New Hampshire. The

Boston Globe has much readership in

New Hampshire. The poll showed Dean

going down steadily: "There was no

evidence that Dean's debate performance

Thursday or his interview with Diane

Sawyer on ABC's `Prime Time

Thursday' had slowed his slide. `He's still

going down,' Chervinsky said."(3) It turns

out just as Dean had said, that his poll

numbers were going up and that he had

already bottomed out, which is why he

ended up with about double the votes the

Boston Globe predicted when New

Hampshire actually voted.

You should have given us at MIM $5

million instead of giving Dean $50 million.

You would have accomplished much

more, if opposing the war and

corresponding repression like the Patriot

Act were your aim. Now the only chance

for Dean is if Kerry implodes and resigns

in scandal before the Democratic Party

convention.

The Democrats including Dean are

trying to tell you not to bolt for a third

party.(1) They call it realism to support

John Kerry, who voted for the

intensification of the Iraq war and

authored part of the Patriot Act. That may

be realism--realism for the enemy. The

enemy gets everything and you get

nothing.

Kerry said what people wanted to hear,

even when it went against basic

principles. When Dean said Osama bin

Laden should get a fair trial if captured,

Kerry said, "What in the world were you

thinking?"(4) That's the sort of thing

Kerry did to gain ground on Dean. People

who want to oppose war and the Patriot

Act but still buy the donkey's crap do so

from a lack of understanding power and

how it works. Kerry understands the job

of politician. The question is now whether

Deaniacs understand the job of creating

change.

Lesson #1: Bourgeois politicians do

not create change: at best they reflect

it and usually they deflect it. The real

task is to change public opinion first.

Howard Dean did not lead any anti-

war movement before running for

president. He saw that his main

competitors Gephardt, Kerry, Edwards

and Lieberman had all voted for the war

in Congress and so he jumped on the anti-

war bandwagon--no anti-war

bandwagon, no Dean anti-war

"movement."

Dean and Trippi did not create anything:

they leached off an anti-war movement

that was not strong enough to force the

rulers to offer to let Dean win as an anti-

war candidate. Since all the major

Lessons from the Democratic Party primaries

Democrats running for president and the

Democratic Party leaders had supported

escalating the war on Iraq as Bush asked,

U.$. imperialist politicians proved their

bias toward war. The task is not to support

Dean, but to build a political space that

he and other politicians will find attractive

to jump into, as all bourgeois politicians

are opportunists. Then to win, the

movement must be strong enough to force

through change, not just put up politicians

taken down by professional handlers.

Lesson #2: If the truth is unpopular,

a bourgeois politician will not say it,

even if s/he knows it very well.

That goes for telling Amerikkkans that

they imprison more people percentage-

wise than any other people or that the

Clinton administration used the UN to

infiltrate CIA spies into Iraq, for example.

Very often the problem is that what needs

to be said would offend Amerikkkan

nationalists.

Conversely the more unpopular one is

willing to be, the more truth one may utter.

The result is that political truth is in short

supply in our electoral politics and media,

because by definition successful

politicians that receive media coverage

are popular.

Anyone who violates this lesson will fail

as a bourgeois politician, because there

will always be those willing to abide by it.

However, this truth is also the reason that

an independent activist can be more

powerful than a senator. In fact, Kerry

has the trappings of power but no power

himself. He is only a cog in a machine--

someone who has to play within set

parameters or be ousted. For those

opposing the war and the Patriot Act,

Kerry has no power to offer, only the

trappings.

As a result, leaders and politicians are

usually not the same thing. People join

Leninist vanguard parties in order to

abandon the logic of saying what people

want to hear instead of what they need

to hear. Movement leaders create

change, not politicians. It is not possible

to support a bourgeois politician for

change. Those politicians support you only

after you have made the truth popular.

Sometimes they even bring a Trojan horse

when a movement gets too popular.

If for some reason a potentially

unpopular subject can no longer be

avoided, the job of the professional

bourgeois politician is to water down the

truth till it is unrecognizable. As a result,

getting politicians to handle issues is not

an advance, but a setback.

In rare instances, a politician may

succeed with backward people by posing

one unpopular idea as better than

something even more unpopular. For

example, a politician may tell southern

voters that the state should certify Black

nurses, because otherwise white wimmin

will be tending to Black men in hospitals.

Allowing Blacks to be nurses is an

advance, but it comes at the expense of

legitimizing racism. That's typical of

politicians and an example of the best one

can hope for from them.

Lesson #3: Except for 10% of the

population, the U.$. public is not

issues-driven in political decisions.

Persynality and reasoning concerning

psychological motivations preoccupy the

public, if politics is of any account at all.

Monica Lewinsky is important, but the

war in Iraq is not according to most voters

in practice, whether they admit it or not.

For example, Sharpton, Kucinich and

Dean claimed to oppose the Iraq war.

Polls show that 60%, 70% or even more

Democrats claimed to agree on that issue,

but the combined Sharpton, Kucinich and

Dean vote was less than Kerry's in Iowa

and New Hampshire. War-voting

senators Kerry and Edwards took 69%

of the vote and the supposedly anti-war

candidates took 19% in Iowa. It was only

a few percentage points better in New

Hampshire.

Although we did not support any of the

candidates, it's important to understand

why Democratic Party voters did or did

not vote for Dean/Kucinich/Sharpton by

their own reasoning. We at MIM look at

practice, not what people say. Those

people participating in electoral politics

become corrupted by the process even if

they do not intend it. They say one thing

and do another shortly thereafter.

The reason for that: even the issue of

war and peace is still not central in

Amerikkkan voters' minds. In Iowa, "Just

14 percent said the war in Iraq had shaped

their final decision, even though 75 percent

said they opposed the war."(5) The same

New York Times poll showed that 50%

of voters claimed to "strongly"

disapprove of the war. This is not an

example of politicians or pollsters lying.

It's the bourgeoisified public lying to

itself--vacillating and calling that a

"strong" stand. In truth, the opposition to

the war is watery, not strong, not informed

by Marxist analysis and experience, and

there are very few foreign policy issues

that will show up much more strongly

than the Iraq War. Almost all the other

issues are the same way or even less

important to 90% of the population.

A proof of this general fact is in the

open in professional Republican strategy

this year regarding John Kerry: "`He is a

liberal Democrat who has voted in such

a way that kept liberal people from

Massachusetts happy with him,' said

Grover Norquist, president for Americans

for Tax Reform, a conservative group that

advocates tax cuts. `What else, in a busy

world, do you have to know about

somebody?'"(6) The U.$. population is

not going to go deeply into issues and the

professional operatives know it. The two-

party system has the purpose of creating

an impression of consent, not regular

political participation.

The CIA can carry out coups and the

military can distribute pornography in Iraq

and no decisive portion of the

bourgeoisified population will notice. This

fact causes terrorists to carry out

spectacular acts, because they notice

Amerikkkans are not paying attention any

other way.

The problem is that the Amerikkkans

do not care to think about issues in general

and when they do, they believe they have

to compromise with the existing powers

to such an extent that they vote for

people with exactly opposite stands even

on war questions. The rationalizations for

why they abandoned Howard Dean,

Sharpton and Kucinich even by their own

reasoning are an expression of the voters'

adjustment to the power of the rulers, and

their own short-run petty-bourgeois class

interests, rather than a statement of

shrewdness.

Lesson #4: The U.$. public opposes

negative issue advertising because of

lesson #3, not from some hidden

nobility of purpose.

Kerry and Edwards won in Iowa,

because negative advertising by Dean and

Gephardt left themselves tarnished. In a

multi-persyn campaign field, the

Amerikkkan voter often rewards the one

being least attacked and least attacking.

The New York Times found a typical

example: "`He's [Edwards--ed.] the only

one I heard so far who hasn't blasted the

other candidates,' Mr. Buttrey said. `I

don't want to hear what the other guy's

doing. I want to hear what you're going

to do.'"(7) The true reason for this is that

Amerikkkan voters--petty-bourgeoisie

that they are--try to evaluate individual

candidates, not issues, not questions of

class, nation and gender. The petty-

bourgeoisie tends to believe that classes

and the existence of group oppression are

a fiction anyway. For them, there really

are no "issues," only individuals struggling

to do this or that and make their own

individual meanings. That's why voters

fixate on candidate biography much more

than issues.

Lesson #5: If you want a salary from

the government for brokering between

rulers and already existing public

opinion, become a politician. If you

want change, you should seek to

become a revolutionary with

professional methods or give your

resources to revolutionaries with

professional methods.

What matters is what the public

demands and how intensely with what

willingness to take action. Creating the

demand is the job of the professional

revolutionary.

Lesson #6: You can spend your whole

life as a professional politician, reach

the height of power and not accomplish

anything that came specifically from

your own will.

As a senator, Kerry had to argue that

Bush fooled him and that is why he voted

for the escalation of the Iraq War--one

of the most powerful men in the country

Continued from page 1...

Continued on next page...

MIM Notes 298 · March 15, 2004 · Page 7

In this political campaign season, we

are already hearing how Dean and Nader

supporters should moderate themselves

into oblivious disregard for any principles

they might have regarding the Iraq war.

The calls from the Boston Globe type of

elite are timely especially because John

Kerry supported Bush Jr.'s Baghdad

adventure. Yet there is a price to such

political moderation as opposed to political

leadership. The Iraq war itself is a case

in point of how backsliding moderation

led to public perception that led to war.

Rather than go to the public and say

that the war on Iraq and the sanctions

are genocidal, President Bill Clinton kept

the sanctions in place and gave his UN

Security Council partners France, China

and Russia a hard time. While the U.$.

Government vetoed medical equipment

for Iraq, no one at home could say that

Clinton was soft on Iraq. This was putting

the politician principle above the needs

of world peace and prevention of

genocide. The U.$. public either did not

care or did not mind genocide against

Iraqis and so Clinton did nothing to show

he disagreed with majority opinion. That's

what a bourgeois politician has to do to

stay in power. Whatever his or her own

opinion, any politician like Clinton knows

that perception rules, not truth.

Finally, the key was that Clinton initiated

the "regime change" policy just as George

Bush Jr. is now saying in order to distract

from the problems in Iraq. Bush is not

lying about this: the Clinton administration

came up with the very phrase "regime

change."

Iraq caught Clinton sending the CIA to

infiltrate the weapons inspections teams

in Iraq, and since then some of the officials

involved have admitted they went to Iraq,

not to inspect for weapons but to arrange

Saddam Hussein's removal. It should

have been a huge scandal, but only 10%

of the U.$ public pays any attention to

foreign affairs while another 70% trusts

whatever the imperialist government

would do on questions of war and peace

abroad, as long as no U.$. troops die. As

a result, the U.$. public never learned that

Saddam Hussein did cooperate with UN

inspections and that it was Amerikkka

that wanted them to fail so that sanctions

would not be lifted. Clinton wanted the

sanctions in order to weaken Iraq through

genocide and exert pressure on all the

oil-producing Arab states. Instead of the

truth, we in Amerika had the lie that

Saddam Hussein was not complying with

UN principles when it fact it was Uncle

$am not complying with the UN

resolution that specified when sanctions

had to be lifted. Now there is a big gap in

understanding of the period leading up to

the war.

There was no politician able to go

before the public and say so--just people

like MIM. This again reflects the prime

directive for bourgeois politicians: "say

what people want to hear." Such a

politician trying to straighten out the

situation would have had to say: "we do

not want the weapons inspections to

succeed, so we sent the CIA to provoke

Saddam Hussein into cancelling the

weapons inspections." As one might

imagine, the complexity of the statement

would have doomed it, not to mention its

clear evil. Even so, Saddam Hussein

complained, but then allowed inspections

to continue anyway!

Now the Amerikan population is

catching up and learning that their

politicians lied on everything from

uraniumgate to weapons of mass

destruction. It will even matter for a

handful of percentage points (less than

10) in the 2004 elections. With race and

class the same between Bush and Kerry

and regions supporting the candidates

approximately equally, and with the last

election decided by less than 600 "votes"

in Florida, the small percentage of

Amerikans paying attention to the Iraq

related stories may even decide the

election in 2004.

Although it is true that Clinton paved

the way for the intensification of the Iraq

war and bombed Iraq himself, the Bush

administration continues to lie about the

past. Shrub had the chance when he came

to power in 2000 to say, "look, Clinton

was a wuss and did not want to tell people

that weapons inspections in Iraq did

succeed and Saddam Hussein did

cooperate. He sent the CIA with the

mission of deposing Saddam Hussein, so

that's why we had to make it look like

Saddam Hussein was opposing weapons

inspections. The obvious inexcusable

truth is that Clinton jeopardized weapons

inspections globally by establishing a

reputation that those who cooperate will

have CIA agents on their soil only to face

a war when those CIA agents fail to

subvert the government. Cooperation with

UN weapons inspectors leads to CIA

infiltration which leads to better planning

for war. Now imagine how many

countries will cooperate with that. Even

I the Shrub would not cooperate with

that." Shrub had his chance to lay it all

out, but instead he took the Clinton line to

its logical conclusion. It was not that the

Shrub is right:

Clinton paved the way for Baghdad occupation

united $tates cared about weapons of

mass destruction. The failure was in

regime change and that is why there was

a war.

We believe Clinton himself speculated

that the House would not impeach him if

he took an even tougher stance on Iraq.

That's why he bombed Iraq during

Lewinskygate.

"Defense Secretary" Donald Rumsfeld

continues the Bush administration

misleadership to this day: "`It was his

[Saddam Hussein's--MIM] choice. And

if he had chosen differently--if the Iraqi

regime had taken the [disarmament--

Boston Globe] steps Libya is now

taking--there would have been no war.'"

Saddam Hussein did take the steps--

sooner than Libya did--and he tolerated

CIA spies on his soil to prove it to the

world.

Thanks to the capitalist system and its

weapons contractors (with Uncle $am

protecting most of the world's weapons

business), Saddam Hussein and anyone

else can stop a weapons program and do

it in public view and then six months later,

they or the new puppets in power can

get on the black market, pay the bucks

and get back to business. Weapons

proliferation is inevitable under capitalism.

When we hear politicians take U.$.

weapons of mass destruction seriously

and admit that capitalism motivates arms

dealers indiscriminately, we will know that

our movement succeeded.

Note: Boston Globe 8Feb2004, p. a6.

For more book reviews and articles on

the subject of the CIA & Clinton in Iraq,

see the Iraq section of our agitation web

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

agitation/iraq/index.html

simply fooled and powerless. Kerry has

the nerve to tell the public that he thought

Bush would negotiate through the UN;

thus, being a senator is no better than

being a voter.

The reason for that is politicians must

follow the rules of the system or lose.

Even a president can be weakened

politically into almost uselessness. Clinton

faced a Republican Congress after his

second year in office and then came the

Monica Lewinsky debacle.

Those who have spent their lives

conforming to the public, campaign donors

and media expectations do not know how

to lead toward solutions to social

problems. When they become political

leaders, they go on doing what they were

doing before.

Deaniacs, there is a bitter truth to learn.

Kerry's professionals outclassed you

though you outnumbered them. Part of

the reason is that contrary to two-party

dogma, political effectiveness is not about

spending a year figuring out how to

swallow war and repression and a few

seconds voting in a voting booth. With that

focus, the anti-war and anti-Patriot Act

activists will never learn the skills

necessary to overcome the

Establishment. That's exactly what the

Democratic Party wants.

Deaniacs, the Boston Globe is offering

you Kerry and his leadership "in

advancing AmeriCorps and other service

programs" as a way to "reach out" to

you.(8) We suspect some Deaniacs will

fall for that. We are hoping that at least

some Deaniacs do not seek government

jobs and really do see a difference

between supporting the war and the

Patriot Act and not supporting them--

based on the issues and not the candidate,

because Dean himself says they are not

important enough to break from the

Democratic Party. The choice is yours

Deaniacs, the issues or the bullshit. We

hope you make a commitment to regular

political action on behalf of the issues

independent of the Democratic Party.

Notes:
1. See for example, "A bridge to Dean Nation,"
Boston Globe 24Feb2004, p. a19. On February

24th, the Boston Globe sent a lynch mob against
Nader on its editorial pages. The only pro-Nader
piece sounded "Republican" in saying
Democrats don't have an agenda other than
hating Bush.
2. New York Times 31Jan2004, p. a14.

Lessons from the Democratic Party primaries

Continued from previous page...

Kerry opposes

gay marriage

He's already said that despite his vote

for the Iraq war, "`If you don't think I

would have handled this differently than

George W. Bush, don't vote for me.'"(1)

Now Democratic Party candidate for

president John Kerry has entered the

Massachusetts battle on gay rights by

saying he favors separate but equal

treatment for gays and lesbians through

civil union, not marriage.(2) It's just

another proof that politicians reflect public

sentiment and they cannot be expected

to lead change. Career politicians are not

movement leaders, so substituting one for

the other will lead to apolitical frustration:

3. "As Kerry extends lead, plans shift," Boston
Globe 24Jan2004, p. a6.
4. "Shift in strategy fueled Kerry turnaround,"
Boston Globe 8Feb2004, p. a24.
5. New York Times 20Jan2004, p.1.
6. The Sun (Baltimore) 27Jan2004, p. 9a.
7. New York Times 20Jan2004, p. 15.
8. Boston Globe 19Feb2004, p. a14.

just ask thousands of Howard Dean

volunteers.

Politicians have to say what people want

to hear or they do not get elected. Once

we learn this lesson, we stop "trusting"

politicians to have the inside information

on weapons of mass destruction as in Iraq

and we stop expecting any truth or

wisdom to emerge from their mouths. The

key is to start a movement for the truth

and then the by-definition-opportunist-

politicians will adjust.

Note:

1. http://www.boston.com/news/nation/

a r t i c l e s / 2 0 0 4 / 0 2 / 0 4 /

perceived_as_electable_kerry_adds_victories_and_momentum/

2. "Kerry backs state ban on gay

marriage," Boston Globe 26Feb2004, p.

MIM Notes 298 · March 15, 2004 · Page 8

The CIA said Neptune was still in power

as March 4th but sought to cast doubt on

all his departments while supporting the

new interim president.(5)

A few days later, Gerard Latortue from

Boca Raton, Florida arrived to take power

as prime minister.(6) He had left Haiti in

1988, thanks to pressure from another

U.$.-backed regime. U.$. Government

documents and interviews with the BBC

show that Latortue was the choice of the

United $tates, not elections in Haiti. In

case the Haitian people do not get the

message, the United $tates landed 1600

troops. Official government documents

read as follows: "A U-S backed advisory

panel has chosen a new prime minister

for Haiti. V-O-A's [Voice of America's--

mim ed.] Jim Teeple reports the move

comes as multi-national troops in Haiti say

they will soon begin disarmament

operations in Haiti.

"Gerard Latortue, a former political

refugee and foreign minister in Haiti is

his country's new prime minister. Mr.

Latortue, was chosen after five days of

deliberations by the so called council of

wise individuals, a panel selected to

choose a new prime minister after the

departure of President Jean Bertrand

Aristide."(7)

The only indications from the U.$.

officials of their true motivations mention

some sense of entitlement because of U.$.

aid to Haiti including the aid of U.$. troops.

These criticisms of Haiti only show what

a low priority Uncle $am places on

elections. Pretty much anything justifies

overturning them in their minds despite

rhetoric to the contrary.

In another manifestation of deeper

fissures in the ruling class breaking up

their usual bipartisan unity, Senator Kerry,

the presumed Democratic Party nominee

for president in November 2004 elections,

said that the United $tates should have

sent troops to back Aristide. Of course,

at meetings of leaders of Latin America

and the Caribbean in particular, the

imperialists and Caribbean leaders agreed

to support each other's "democracies"

in the event of instability. In response

Secretary of State Colin Powell said:

"`We found that his performance was so

bad and so wanting that it was going to

be impossible to find a political solution

between the two parties under the

circumstances that existed,' Powell added.

"`And so we were not prepared, nor

was Canada, France or anyone else

prepared to send in a military force, as

(Democratic presidential hopeful and)

Senator (John) Kerry suggests, to prop

up a leader who was seriously

failing.'"(8)

So let's see: Powell is saying elections

are valid, unless of course the elected

leader faces problems. By the way, it was

France that arranged the country for

Aristide to go to in his kidnapping. France

also sent troops. Haiti is a former colony

of France, and Haitians are familiar with

Bush overthrows elected Haiti government

French language.

MIM is not a fan of Aristide's.

Nonetheless, we fully appreciate the

thousands of demonstrators who want

their president back. These protestors are

protesting in the face of U.$. troops and

getting killed for it. "Aristide has to come

back; we don't want Bush as president"

read some protest signs.(9) That's

learning the hard way that imperialist-

style democracy is phony. Already two

people are dead directly thanks to

"peacekeepers" from France and the

United $tates.(10)

We also laugh at Kanada for arresting

Aristide's security chief, Oriel Jean. The

Kanadians are investigating him for "war

crimes,"(11) while letting Amerikkkans

off the hook in Iraq etc. It's a bad joke.

Kanada is also sending 450 troops to

Haiti.(12) We support Aristide's lawyer

who says the U.$. Government officials

involved should be arrested. That would

be Bush and Powell. The Kanadians and

French should also be arrested.

Of other notable hypocrisy--the Bush

administration opposes gun control; yet

the first thing they are doing in Haiti is

carrying out a policy to disarm everyone.

The National Rifle Association (NRA)

should be screaming about this. If the

United $tates is backing "democracy" in

Haiti, then there is no need to be carrying

out radical "gun control" in Haiti.

MIM is not in favor of "democracy" in

the sense of majority rule at this time.

There are much better ways to channel

popular input than pulling a lever in a

voting booth every couple years and we

do not believe majorities of the United

$tates should have the "right" to tell gays

if they can marry or if Iraqis can import

medical devices from abroad. However,

even though we do not support

"democracy" in the sense used by the

United $tates, we point out the facts about

Haiti to uncover the hypocrisy of U.$.

leaders claiming to uphold elections.

There are some advantages to the political

system of voting that Bush is constantly

touting and claiming. Yet those

advantages are on paper only, because in

practice the imperialists do not respect

their own bourgeois-style elections, as in

Haiti's case.

There is an important lesson in political

realism to learn in all this and once we

learn it, we move a major step closer to

the communist road: democracy is not

possible under capitalism. Capitalism

develops to a stage of monopoly

capitalism where business interests direct

political leaders to take a global view of

control.

When there was a Soviet Union, the

U.$. Government used to justify its actions

overthrowing democratically elected

governments by pointing to competition

with the Soviet Union. That did not

address why the United $tates did the

same thing before there was a Soviet

Union in 1917. Now that there is no Soviet

Union, we can see that the motivations

for the United $tates to overthrow elected

governments are not what the imperialists

say.

Even being a democratically elected

lackey of the United $tates does not

create stability and protect the people.

Our disagreement with Aristide is that he

thought it would be possible to co-exist

with U.$. imperialism. Now even the

Kanadians admit that in Haiti "with

morgues full and government offices

closed, bodies were piling up, littering

streets," as late as 11 March.(12) U.$.

imperialism does not respect anything but

its own selfish and militarist interests. If

Haitians want control of their own destiny,

they have no choice but to join with the

international proletariat in conquering U.$.

imperialism.

Notes:
1. http://www.state.gov/p/wha/rls/rm/27975.htm
2. http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2004/

29990.htm
3. http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/
RTGAM.20 040302.wxhaitibush0302/BNStory/
Front/
4. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/
3545229.stm
5. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/
3545229.stm
6. http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/
news/world/haiti/8156653.htm
7. http://ibb7.ibb.gov/newswire/27e8094d.html
8. http://www.news24.com/News24/World/
News/0,,2-10-1462_1495741,00.html
9. http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/TorontoSun/
News/2004/03/12/379177.html
10. http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/
news/world/americas/8148729.htm
11. http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/
CalgarySun/News/2004/03/12/379266.html
12. "US in Haiti gun hunt," http://
www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/TorontoSun/News/
2004/03/12/379179.html

Continued from page 1...

only to be left dying. He had been

accused of cutting a neighbor with a soda

can and ended up getting a de facto death

sentence for it.

No sooner did Miami start the firing

procedure than a new revelation came

out. A 16-year-old committed suicide in

the same Miami-Dade lockup that let

Omar Paisley die. Then the guards

invented documents to show that they had

been monitoring the boy as they should

have been.(3) It's another proof why

MIM says there should be video cameras

in prisons and cop-cars-- focused on the

law enforcement officials.

MIM assures the public that the only

difference Miami-Dade and the rest of

the country is that Miami-Dade has some

top-level fighting going on about how to

treat prisoners. For some reason, one

particular official, Interim Secretary C.

George Denman, has the backing of the

state legislature to roll heads to clean up

problems. Apparently the exposure has

been too much.

One serious problem in this country is

that it is too liberal with anyone in the law

enforcement profession. This case where

law enforcement officials face

punishment is the very rare exception. No

matter what crimes people in the law

enforcement profession commit, some

Liberal (whether conservative or liberal

Liberal) will make excuses.

This country would see a lot fewer

people released from death row on DNA

evidence if the law enforcement

profession did not get such Liberal

treatment.

If more prosecutors, judges and lying cops

faced murder and attempted murder charges
when they falsely convict people, we would
not see things like half of Illinois convictions
for murder turning out to be false after review
of DNA and other objective evidence. Many
people would leave the law enforcement
profession and we would see its quality rise.

Fascist prison officials:

From page 1...

MIM considers the law enforcement

profession as central to the future dictatorship
of the proletariat. It is essential that its leaders
be altruists willing to give up their lives for

failure that causes mass deaths. We believe
the people will give up their old system of
voting for candidates who kiss babies and

make empty promises in exchange for another
system in which only a relative minority of
people is willing to serve in key public offices

because of the self-sacrifice involved. Instead
of serving in the Army in Iraq, well-intentioned
people should serve in the law enforcement

of the dictatorship of the proletariat. Instead
of having too many candidates for plum
government jobs, we should have a situation

of too few people to fill roles of power. Let the
capable altruists have more power and they
will set up a better system than we have now.

That's why MIM calls for the death penalty

for lying cops and prosecutors involved in
cases that could produce life sentences or

death penalties for innocent people. These
professional liars in law enforcement are
enemies of the people. Before anyone else

receives the death penalty, the law
enforcement profession itself has to be
weeded out with the death penalty. Otherwise

it deserves no credibility in administering a
death penalty. Short of that, MIM has said
the United $tates should have a moratorium

on the death penalty until the day when the
dictatorship of the proletariat straightens out
the motivations of law enforcement.

These lying cops, prosecutors, hangin'

judges and prison officials make their fame at
the expense of innocent people. Clinton was

a prosecutor before he became governor of
Arkansas and president. John Kerry was also
a prosecutor. Prosecutors, legislators hoping

to be governors some day and governors
have everything to gain from abusive
treatment of innocent people and nothing to

lose. That equation has to change.

Notes:
1. Associated Press in Boston Globe 28
Feb2004, p. a5.
2. http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/
news/8152551.htm
3. http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/
news/8156655.htm

MIM Notes 298 · March 15, 2004 · Page 9

MIM's central task: "to create public

opinion and the independent

institutions of the oppressed to seize

power."

by PIRAO Chief

March 5, 2004

January and early February established

new records for MIM Notes distribution.

Those records go beyond what we

previously published in these reports, so

we have invented a new figure to keep

track of how quickly we actually distribute

the newspapers. This new figure is a cut-

off figure for which the point is how long

does it take to distribute 80% of the

newspapers printed.

Another bright spot was for Notas

Rojas, which saw a record distribution.

New York City distribution of the new

issue alone surpassed previous total Notas

Rojas distribution for any one issue.

January set records in many regards,

some of which we do not see even in the

above report and we can say right now

that we will not always maintain that pace

without a step up in support. That's not

to say that our gains since the World

Trade Center bombing have been mostly

by a rise in financial support. Actually,

gains are mostly in efficiency.

In December 2003, we saw roughly the

same growth in users, just slightly less.

Any idea that bumping up the MIM Notes

distribution speed as we did this winter

would produce huge growth in our website

users is wrong; although we do see signs

in the details that MIM Notes distribution

does help of course. Likewise, by now I

The stories get published in papers

across the country with audiences in tens

of millions, but professional journalism is

not what it appears to be. A front page

story in the U.$.A.'s largest national

circulation newspaper linking "then-

Yugoslav President Slobodan Milsovic to

`ethnic cleansing'" was a complete

fabrication that came to light when the

New York Times caught its own fabricator

Jason Blair.

Pulitzer Prize finalist Jack Kelley made

up the story for the USA Today and then

came up with an elaborate ruse to cover

it up. USA Today had to hire detectives

to figure out what happened, because the

infrastructure for foreign reporters is so

weak it was impossible to confirm or deny

what Kelley was doing any other way.

Foreign news reporting is especially

vulnerable to fraud and suggestion from

the CIA, because very few Amerikan

reporters are in place in most countries.

For example, a major news agency may

count itself lucky to have a total of three

reporters in a whole country such as

China.

Reporters also have their own reasons

for wanting to please various government

connections including the CIA. Kelley's

stories fit in with a State Department

agenda and no doubt gave him access to

government sources who otherwise might

pay less attention to him. In addition,

playing along with the State Department

guarantees that at least some people will

be interested in his stories and understand

them--no small advantage when the

public may be tempted to say "so what?"

about any foreign news story. By staying

within the parameters set by the State

Department, the USA Today and other

papers know that at least the State

Department will be attempting to explain

what it was USA Today was talking

about. That way the USA Today won't

have to explain something exotic to its

readers from scratch. Likewise, there is

a guarantee that other news outlets will

do the same thing. Hence, news tends to

revolve around U.$. Government

criticism of other countries, and the more

sensational the criticisms, the better for

newspaper profits.

The bottom line problem is not integrity

of individual reporters as the USA Today

and New York Times now suggest. The

bottom line problem is profit corrupting

news systematically, so corruption is

guaranteed. All news is subject to

corruption under capitalism, but foreign

reporting by U.$. reporters is the worst.

The U.$. public does not pay much for

news from foreign countries. That's why

papers like the International Herald

Tribune had to be cut back in column

inches and pages and are pretty much a

failure. The U.$. public would rather be

watching "Sex in the City" or reading

"Cosmopolitan" magazine. Hence, even

the biggest news corporations have to

make a mountain out of a molehill or go

out of business.

The foreign reporting of the largest

services like USA Today, New York Times

and Associated Press is in fact pathetic,

guided by a handful of often terribly

ignorant people in each case, but the

impact of the stories of these news

services is enormous. What little foreign

news these corporations do put in the

paper faces the pressure of competing

for readership the way "Average Joe"

competes for television advertising. And

just as "Average Joe" and "Bachelor"

make up scripts to attract viewers despite

being called "reality TV," so do the

newspapers come under pressure to have

sensational stories about things they do

not have many people working on and

frankly do not know that much about.

There is no better way to have a

sensational story within a range of views

accepted by the State Department than

to make the story up. That's not to

mention that the standard story on foreign

affairs simply reports whatever the U.$.

Government says as gospel.

Although the USA Today has admitted

to the fraud we also cannot assure the

public that the ultimate source of how

USA Today figured out the fraud is pure

either. There may also be another corrupt

agenda behind the exposure of Kelley, but

that won't make Kelley right or the news

that USA Today reports any better.

We consider it no accident that Kelley

is married to the USA Today Senior Vice

President of Advertising. We at MIM

predict that even corrupt Amerikkkans

may someday prefer that their

newspapers and TV news report the truth

instead of whatever entertains the public

and brings in the dinero. It's just that right

now Amerikkkans are not prepared to

hear the inevitable: truth suffers under

financial pressure and the only solution is

socialism.

Notes:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/2004-01-13-
usatoday-statement_x.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/news/2004-01-13-
reporter_x.htm

Foreign news reporting in Amerika a bad joke

Central task report: January and February 2004

should also point out that anyone who

thinks that replacing the home page as

we did is going to help our traffic should

also look at the growth figures and

conclude otherwise. In February, the art

page alone had more users than our home

page.

After setting a record for distribution

in January and continuing the pace into

early February, of course dialectics set in

and some mini-disasters actually ended

in a big setback. The February 15th MIM

Notes was going to come out late or not

at all and we chose not at all. We have

January, 2003

January, 2004

% change

Number of different computers MIM served

23536

42764

+82%

Avg. MIM pages served per day

2271

3521

+55%

MIM data transferred

7.148 gigs

3.02 gigs

-58%

MIM Notes (English) printed copies compared with pre-911=100

222

All language newspapers printed copies compared with pre-911=100

333

Number of top 53 cites of U.$/Kanada receiving at least 1000 MIM Notes

Unknown

Average days after print date by which 80% of papers have been distributed

Unknown

MIM prison circulation averaged over two months Jan 2002=100

Number of Art page users

7711

Number of different MIM web page files actively chosen from

4496

4601

+2.3%

Amazon visitors sent from web page

281

830

+195%

Number of different computers MIM served

25869

47311

+83%

Avg. MIM pages served per day

2370

3933

+66%

MIM data transferred

4.36 gigs

3.12 gigs

-28%

MIM Notes (English) printed copies compared with pre-911=100

111

All language newspapers printed copies compared with pre-911=100

111

Number of top 53 cites of U.$/Kanada receiving at least 1000 MIM Notes

Unknown

Average days after print date by which 80% of papers have been distributed

Unknown

MIM prison circulation averaged over two months Jan 2002=100

Number of Art page users

7117

20023

+181%

Number of different MIM web page files actively chosen from

4133

4538

+10%

Amazon visitors sent from web page

305

900

+195%

This report excludes all art, and most robots and developer hits for 2004 but not 2003.

Top 50 U.$. cities plus Vancouver, Montreal and Toronto

not missed a planned MIM Notes like that

in several years. Hence, combined, the

January and February distribution ended

up being like that of late 2003, because

January was good, but February was bad.

In February, the art page set a great

new record. It's nice to know that we

can have as many problems as we did

and the web page work continues to go

forward.

MIM Notes 298 · March 15, 2004 · 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

Join the fight against

the injustice system

While we fight to end the criminal

injustice system MIM engages in

reformist battles to improve the lives

of prisoners. Below are some of the

campaigns we are currently waging,

and ways people behind the bars and

on the outside can get involved. More

info can be found on our prison web

site: http://www.etext.org/Politics/

MIM/agitation/prisons

Stop Censorship in Prison: Prisons

frequently censor books, newspapers

and magazines coming from MIM's

books for prisoners program. We need

help from lawyers, paralegals and

jailhouse lawyers to fight this

censorship.

Books for Prisoners: This program

focuses on political education of

prisoners. Send donations of books and

money for our Books for Prisoners

program.

End the Three Strikes laws: This

campaign is actively fighting the

repressive California laws, but similar

laws exist in other states. Write to us

to request a petition to collect

signatures. Send articles and

information on three strike laws.

Shut Down the Control Units: Across

the country there are a growing number

of prison control units. These are

permanently designated prisons or cells

in prisons that lock prisoners up in

solitary or small group confinement for

22 or more hours a day with no

congregate dining, exercise or other

services, and virtually no programs for

prisoners. Prisoners are placed in

control units for extended periods of

time. These units cause both mental and

physical problems for prisoners.

Write to us to request a petition to

collect signatures. Get your

organization to sign the statement

demanding control units be shut down.

Send us information about where there

are control units in your state. Include

the names of the prisons as well as the

number of control unit beds/cells in

each prison if that is known. Send us

anti-control unit artwork.

MIM's Re-Lease on Life Program:

This program provides support for our

comrades who have been recently

released from the prison system, to help

them meet their basic needs and also

continue with their revolutionary

organizing on the outside. We need

funds, housing, and job resources. We

also need prisoner's input on the

following survey questions:

1. What are the biggest challenges

you face being released from prison?

2. How can these problems be

addressed?

3. What are the important elements

of a successful release program?

Texas prisoner abuse

I would like to start off by saying that I

really appreciate the newspaper that I've been

receiving from y'all over the last couple of
years. They have really been an inspiration
to me.

As far as conditions here on this unit, I

would put it at zero on a scale of 1 to 10. This
unit is the most racial and brutal in the system,

and it's not from prisoners but from guards
abusing their authority and nobody seems to
do nothing about it.

Just recently there was a use of force and

the prisoner had his thumb broken. I myself
have had bruised ribs, hand-cuff marks on

my wrists and shackles left on my ankles.
Going trough the grievance procedure
doesn't resolve anything - it only escalates

into bigger problems.

This unit is racial and prejudiced towards

prisoners, mostly if you're Spanish and Black

-- especially if you contribute to any litigation
in court. I'm literate in court and I assist other
prisoners. I get retaliated against by being

denied access to court, denied legal material
and indigent supplies most of the time, denied
legal visits to prisoners that seek legal help.

They also refuse to feed me for no justification
and use excessive force, (for example) kicking
my ribs with heavy shoes on and twisting my

leg trying to get it to snap. And the lieutenant
and sergeant stood around and allowed the
guards to proceed with the excessive force

and all the time they claim that I'm resisting.

These people only use the rules to benefit

themselves. If we have a right to something

then they claim there is no such rule, and if
we harp on it or file a grievance about it then
later on we receive a disciplinary infraction

for something else. Even with a lawsuit
pressed against it and court orders, this unit
still doesn't even acknowledge anything.

--A Texas Prisoner, November 2003

SHUs in Virginia too

Yesterday a brother happened to send me

one of your MIM Notes and I was astounded.
Under the current levels of repression that
we are held under, I couldn't believe that

something this powerful was being let into
this institution. I've been up all night reading
your newsletter and wondering, "How do I

get involved?"

A lot of things you spoke of pertaining to

the Security Housing Unit (SHU) [in California

- ed] are happening here in Virginia. ... It was
like a breath of fresh air to hear someone is
fighting against the SHU. It just hurts to know

no one in Virginia seems to care.

As if that isn't enough, Virginia has opened

these level 5 and 6 institutions, Red Onion,

Wallens Ridge and Sussex State Prisons. Each
institution is armed with shotguns inside the
pods, cafeteria, rec yards and gym. These

shotguns have rubber pellets but at any time
officers in the gun posts have access to live
rounds. We are supposed to be on 20 hours

lock and 4 hours rec, but they always find a
way to take rec. The conditions are close to,
if not the same as the SHU.

What is more troubling is the criteria it takes

to get on these institutions. They're
supposed to be for the worst of the worse

prisoners, but over 90% of the population
came up straight from receiving with no
institutional records. I was sent here to

Wallens Ridge with no institutional record,
and when I wrote to the Central Classification
Board their justification was that I had over

25 years [sentence] so I met the criteria. I
thought I was sentenced by the judge to come
to prison to do my time, not sentenced by the

judge to come to prison and get sentenced
again.

It's like there's no set criteria to get sent to

these level 5 and 6 institutions and damn near
impossible to get off. You can stay charge
free, get our points down, and still be

overrode to stay here.

It is ridiculous and I am fed up. I want to

fight against what they are doing to me and

prisoners like myself. All I want to know is,
how do I fight against this? Can you please
help me get involved in the fight and inform

me the best route to take in fighting this type
of injustice?

--A Virginia prisoner, January 2004

MIM responds: We are glad to hear from a

Virginia prisoner as we build the campaign
against control units. It is important to

recognize that aspects of the SHU may be
present in many units even if they are not
designated as SHUs. We urge opponents of

prison abuse and torture to become
signatories of our statement "Shut Down All
Control Units!" -- and help spread the word

to get others involved in the campaign. For
more information see www.etext.org/Politics/
MIM/agitation/prisons/ or write to MIM at

the address on page 2.

Conditions at
Washington C.C.

I'm housed in a control unit at Washington

Corrections Center. It's a Level 5/Max Custody
Intensive Management Unit. I've never been
in "population" at this facility although I

have, as well as every inmate in this state,
come through the R-Units/Receiving.

In the R-Units, 3 men are kept in 1 cell which

is only suitable for 1 man. There are only 2
beds so 1 man is on the floor. Stays can range
from a period of 1 1/2 months to 10 months.

There is intentional racial mixing (i.e., Mexican,
Native, white, Black, and so on living
together), it is "not by choice." White power

and black militants are put in one cell together
which is highly dangerous and inexcusable.

Only 1 exercise period is permitted per day

and it ranges from 45 minutes to 1 hour long.
Showers are permitted every other day. There
are no available reading materials aside from

access to the law library 1 hour per week.
There are limited visiting hours. Cleaning
materials are distributed once a week.

In the MU/Control Unit, the cell size is

moderate. You are only allowed to keep 5
photos in your cell, any excess gets

destroyed. There is 23-hour lockdown 5-days
a week and 24-hour lockdown on Mondays
and Wednesdays. All movement is done

under handcuffs with hands-on escorts and
there is a modified strip search before leaving

the cell at all times. When you are told to be
ready, you must be standing directly on the

yellow line with nothing but briefs on or you
will lose your yard and shower. For mainline
(chowtime), you must also be standing on

the yellow line with your hands face up
(palms) or you won't get to eat and will be
placed on a 72-hour controlled feeding plan.

That's only 72 hours if they feel like it. Food
is distributed in very small portions.

10-minute showers (includes shaving, etc.)

are permitted 3 days a week and haircuts are
given every 30 days. No hair grease or oil is
given to African-Amerikan inmates with long

hair or dry scalps. Yard is 5 days a week.
Cleaning materials are distributed once a
week. Immediate family are allowed only on

visiting days, the length of time varies. Level
1 and 2 is allowed a 1 hour visit per week.
Level 3 is allowed a 2 hour visit per week.

Level 4 is allowed a 3 hour visit per week.

Sick calls could take up to a whole week or

more before being addressed. Medical

emergencies may not be responded to at all
or at the very least there is a significant delay
in response time. Interview slips on important

topics may not be responded to anywhere

MIM Notes 298 · March 15, 2004 · 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 1 week to 2 months, if at all.

Regarding the staff, there are no African-

Amerikans working in the unit at all, or at

least none are visible. It's difficult for African-
Amerikan inmates to get responses or service
from an all-white staff.

- A Washington Prisoner, January 2004

MIM responds: These conditions are

similar in prisons across the country. We need

to educate people about this and expose the
abuse and torture in the criminal injustice
system. But we also need to take a step further

and take action to fight the system. See the
box on the side of these ULK pages for some
ways that you can get involved.

CRIPS Under Attack

Corcoran State Prison pigs claim to have

found a kite (note/letter) on the floor outside

of a holding cage in Administrative
Segregation (Ad-Seg). This kite is alleged to
have been intended for specific members of

this Raymond Street and Blue Note Crips, with
assault on pigs throughout California
Department of Corrections (CDC) in general

and Corcoran State Prison in particular.

Consequently, all Black prisoners in

Corcoran State Prison were immediately

placed on lock down; the LA Times was
notified; and an investigation ensued with
investigative security unit (ISU) Sgt.

Montgomery concluding that I authored this
kite under the authorization of Stanley
Williams (i.e. Big Tookie, Original founder of

the Crip Organization) who is on Death Row
in San Quentin writing/publishing children's
books and advocating the collective uplifting

of the New African here on these Northern
shores of Amerikkka.

ISU also concludes that the alleged kite

was preposterously authored and authorized
due to "Tookie's" appeals are now running
out and in retaliation of the states anticipated

scheduling of his execution. [Stanley Williams
(a.k.a. Tookie) is widely known for his work
as a positive and passive force particularly

working on the education of Black children -
MIM].

Subsequently, four suspected members of

the Raymond Street Crips, including myself,
were charged with the specific act of
"Conspiring to Assault Correctional Staff"

and we were given extensive SHU sentences
without being afforded the opportunity to
question key witnesses or present

exculpatory evidence in our defense.

Though all of us, including "Tookie," were

either in another section or facility from this

kite; no movement to take off on these pigs
have jumped off in any concerted effort in
the last six months we have been in

segregation; there was nothing found in
"Tookie's" cell by the San Quentin ISU to
link any of us to this kite. Nor does any of our

handwritings match this kite, CDC has not
made a single attempt to match the handwriting
of the pigs who claim to have "found" this

kite carelessly laying on the floor outside of

an unoccupied holding cage. This is
outrageous!

Moreover, CDC is now attributing all of the

isolated, alleged and/or unrelated crip/pig
assaults that have occurred throughout CDC
to this mysterious kite and has referred our

cases to the LA Times for further persecution
and to the States District Attorney for
imminent prosecution.

Many of us, such as myself, already have

two prior convictions, are close to parole and
are now facing 25 years to life under

California's 3-strike lynch clause behind these
allegations.

These fabricated allegations CDC has

launched against Crips in general and
Raymond/Blue Note Crips in particular are
but a first string elaborate attack and ploy to

camouflage its strategic persecution of the
Black Prison diaspora, desensitize the public
of the states anticipated execution of a

condemned comrade, and to manufacture an
artificial justification for extended sentences,
convictions and the existence of security

housing units.

Therefore, this writer appeals from this

critical state of emergency to MIM and ULK

readers to call, write, fax and/or e-mail A.K.
Schribner, Warden of Corcoran State Prison
in open protest of this CDC/Media

persecution and District Attorney referral.

Make all references to log number CSP COR

3C-03-08-011.

-- a California prisoner, Feb 2004

California to take
away TV and radio

A notice regarding a proposed change to

the Director's Rules was issued on January
30 but the issue date on the notice itself is
December 30, 2003 - a month later we receive

it. Anyway, the notice is regarding Title 15
California Code of Regulations, to incorporate
new provisions apropos of inmate state wide

vendor package program. But wait a minute.
CDC also very slyly inserted a proposed
amendment to subsection 3044(g)(4)(G)

which states that this section "is amended to
delete text that previously stated that
privilege group D inmates one special canteen

purchase of one television or one radio, or
one radio/TV combo unit. This is necessary
due to the fact that privilege group D inmates

are those who are removed from general
population for disciplinary or administrative
reasons while incarcerated; therefore, for the

safety and security of the institution/facility,
electronic appliances are no longer allowed
for privilege group D - pg#2 of notice of

change to Director's Rules."

So CDC is trying to take away TVs and

radios from privilege group D prisoners which

are SHU and Ad-seg prisoners! Page #1 of
the Notice of Rule change states: "The
Department weighted institutional concerns

against the concerns of inmates in order to
determine reasonable personal property

standards. Reasons supporting the personal
property standards are: (1) reduction of inmate
property (personal) claims; (2) reduction of

bartering or trading between inmates; (3)
reduction of inmates ability to intimidate other
inmates into providing personal property; (4)

increase in staff ability to detect contraband,
drugs, and weapons; (5) reduction of the
possibility of fire in the quarters/living area;

and (6) in the interest of security and safety."
(page 1 of Notice of Change to Director's Rules
(#03/06).)

And according to CDC, these new

provisions are supposed to save $1,744,000 -
cost and savings to the state agency. All this

is a load of manure. CDC is gradually trying
to take away all of our privileges, what little
they are! CDC wants to increase the torture

up a notch.

There is going to be a public hearing

regarding these proposed regulations that will

be held on March 5, 2004, from 9am to 12pm
in the Resources Agency Auditorium 1416
Ninth Street, Sacramento, CA. The purpose

of the hearing is to receive oral comments
about the proposed regulations. Maybe a few
comrades can attend and voice comments

against this bullchet proposal. Or you can
submit comments via e-mail to
RPMB@executive.corr.ca.gov or may submit

written comments: CDC Regulation and Policy
Management Branch (RPMB) PO Box 942883,
Sacramento, CA 94283-0001, by fax: 916-322-

3842. Inquiries go to Rick Grenz, Chief, RPMB,
or to Ann Cunningham, RPMB. All comments
must be received by March 5, 2004 at 5pm.

They don't want us to have any stimulation
at all.

Maybe sending some protest letters to

Senator G. Romero would be good. I wonder
what's next: books? Perhaps cruel and
unusual punishment should be raised at the

hearing. As it is, the control unit conditions
constitute cruel and unusual punishment as
this place is nothing but torture - stark sterility.

What's going to be next to be taken away?
Books, educational material? Publications?
Mail? They have already attempted to limit

our mail. Another thing that should be
addressed is how about the educational
videos that they do show on the "institutional

channels" up here on TV? How are prisoners
enrolled in the GED program supposed to
participate when audiovisuals are used?

-- California prisoner, Feb 2004

From the looks of it, the mail situation here

seems to be improving somewhat. But the
struggle and oppression continues for us.
They recently introduced a proposal to take

away SHU inmates' TVs and Radios. The vast
majority of us here have submitted letters to
Senator Romero, Chief Director Grenz, and

the warden. The removal of these items will
only compound the mental and physical
torture we have to endure here in this hell

hole. Sad to say these items are our only
windows to the outside world.

As you guys can see, our mail is being

withheld for months at a time and our mail is
being thrown away by COs, so it's hard for
one to keep in touch with anyone. It's funny

how this government cries and complains
about human rights and yet it's torturing and
starving it's own people in these hell holes.

Yeah, I said starving because that's what
they're doing to us here. Individuals including
myself are losing weight at an alarming rate.

We've had to go in front of a doctor to see if
he could give us extra food or vitamins.
Things are getting drastic back here but we're

too strong to ever break! They'll never get us
true warriors to lay down and give up.

Here are these addresses, anyone who is

willing or wanting to write a letter in protest
can do so but they must be sent by March 5,
2004, because that's when they are going to

make a final decision on the matter of TVs
and Radios.

Senator Gloria Romero; State Capitol; Room

#501; Sacramento, CA 95814

Chief Director Rick Grenz; Dept. of Corr.;

P.O. Box 942883; Sacramento, CA 94283

--A California Prisoner, February 2004

MIM Notes keeps
prisoners going

Let me express my gratitude for the literature

you sent. Not only will it aid me in my growth
but will also help others as it makes its way
into the hands of other young carnales. MIM

Notes helps keep my organization (The
Almighty Latin Kings and Queens Nation)
abreast of the happenings in the world and in

our homelands. After all, a lot of carnales
aren't conscious of the struggle, the
revolution or the war that is being waged

against us on a daily basis. We had our own
forum, Royal Rage, but I am unsure if it is still
being published. With MIM Notes we're able

to maintain a solid political line with up to
date and factual information.

As for the petition, it was an experience to

say the least. I'm in a cell house that limits my
movement but I did manage to rally a few
signatures (this comrade collected 15

signatures against the Patriot Act and Patriot
Act II).

You would think that after I exposed this

critical information about the Patriot Acts
people would be practically fall over one
another to sign the petition. NOT THE CASE.

The majority of the people are not

conscious and have no desire to become
awake. Almost like zombies, complacent as

hell no fight in `em. There was a handful that
signed and offered decent dialogue on the
topic. I approached some Europeans (white

amerikkans) and we ended up in a heated
debate. Needless to say, none of them signed.
As it is said in MIM Notes: they truly aren't

the vehicle (for revolution) at this point in
time. Eight of the 15 signatures are Latino or
Chicano, the rest are Black Nationalists.

Before I close this letter I would like to share

something with you. The other night the pigs
locked up a true soldier of the Revolution

and a close friend of mine. He's the man who
woke me up by introducing me to
revolutionary thought. Now they've put him

somewhere in the SHU. I'm explaining this to
you because I'm hoping you'll be able to
reach out to him and send him some literature

to keep his mind and thoughts focused. I will
offer you his information. Please help me
support this fallen comrade.

With all this said I want to thank you for

providing a forum for us to dialogue, learn
and grow. Stay strong in this Revolution. We

are making an impact.

In solidarity,
--A prisoner in Indiana, January 2005

MIM Notes 298 · March 15, 2004 · Page 12

Notas Rojas

mar 15, 2004, Nº 298 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

No nos sorprende que los presos paguen

desproporcionadamente cuando los
presupuestos estatales de muchos estados
en el país sufren grandísimas insuficiencias.

El MIM ha recibido muchas cartas de

presos en el estado de Tejas indicando que
este estado se ha empeñado viciosamente en

eliminar los servicios básicos de comida y
ayuda médica para poder ahorrar dinero. Un
activista que lucha contra el sistema carcelario

de Tejas nos informa que "muchas prisiones
sólo ofrecen dos comidas diarias mientras que
en otras cárceles se reduce el tamaño y el

contenido calórico de lo que consumen los
presos diariamente."

Un preso nos escribe: "Las cosas han

empeorado desde la última vez que les escribí.
Aquí en el TDCJ (Departamento de Justicia
Criminal de Tejas) se ha retenido la comida.

Al principio hemos oído varios rumores al
respecto, pero ahora los rumores se han hecho
realidad. El postre se ha retenido tres veces

por semana y ahora la cárcel produce su
propio almíbar. ¡Guácala! Además, ahora nos
dan el desayuno en una bolsita de papel. Pero

lo más diabólico que se ha ingeniado el TDCJ
es la violación de nuestros derechos
religiosos. Ahora por razones presupuestarias

no nos permiten mantener una dieta sin carne
de puerco. Los musulmanes y otros que no
comen carne de puerco no tienen la opción

de sustituir la carne de puerco por otro tipo
de comida (como frijoles, queso o pan). El
menú general se aplica a todos los presos. El

lema del TDCJ es: "Si no te gusta, no te lo
comas."

Un camarada de otra unidad nos cuenta

que "el comedor está muy sucio. Yo no trabajo
para el Departamento de Sanidad pero si ese
fuera el caso, calificaría muy bajo al comedor.

En la entrada del comedor hay charcos de

agua estancada. Las paredes están cubiertas

de insectos muertos. El agua gotea entre las
grietas de las paredes quebradas. No nos
dan los 20 minutos que tenemos garantizados

para comer y las bandejas y los tenedores de
plástico están bien sucios, con restos de
comida pegados desde hace dos o tres días.

Además, siempre se les acaba comida y no
hay hielo en el comedor..."

Mientras los presos pasan hambre y siguen

trabajando gratis por largas horas, los
guardianes siguen viviendo una buena vida.
Según el informe del activista, "el hambre

nunca llega al comedor de los guardianes.
Ahí nunca faltan sopas, ensaladas, huevos,
carne, condimentos, helado, tortas, pasteles

y una gran variedad de otros postres que
provienen gratis en cantidades ilimitadas para
ser distribuidos entre los 40 mil empleados

del TDCJ." Y como el comedor de guardianes
queda abierto las 24 horas todos los días del
año, "algunos de los guardianes van a comer

ahí en sus días libres para no tener que pagar
por su comida en algún restaurante o para no
tener que cocinar en casa."

Resulta que la dieta especial de los

guardianes es una violación de la ley estatal.
El activista nos cuenta que la "sección 13

dice que el TDCJ puede proveer comida a los
guardianes sólo después de que se hayan
satisfecho las necesidades de los presos."

Pero las necesidades de los presos nunca se
satisfacen porque a ellos nunca les toca la
variedad de comida que se les da a los

guardianes. Los guardias reciben lo mejor de
todo y a los presos les tocan restos y migajas.
La sección 13 también estipula que la comida

que reciben los presos debe ser la misma
comida que reciben todos los empleados. Los
directores de las prisiones siempre creen que

la ley no se les aplica a ellos y, por lo tanto,

pasan por alto dicha parte de la sección 13."

Nuestros camaradas de Tejas también nos

han dicho los servicios médicos han sido
retenidos a causa de los problemas

presupuestarios. "Han eliminado a los
trabajadores médicos y han despedido al
técnico del laboratorio. Pasará mucho tiempo

antes de que los presos tengan acceso a
pruebas de SIDA, hepatitis y otros análisis
de sangre. Yo sigo esperando una prueba de

sangre para saber si sufro de una úlcera o no.
Ya llevo tres semanas esperando y aún no me
han hecho la prueba. Hombre, en este lugar

La Liga Revolucionaria
Antiimperialista (LRAI) participa
en la semana de la "Educación no
Encarcelación".

Traducido por Células de Estudio para

la Liberación de Aztlán y América Latina.

Las unidades de máxima seguridad son

cárceles especiales dentro de una cárcel

diseñadas para impedir la organización de los
presos.

En California, el MIM y la LRAI están

llevando a cabo una lucha prolongada para
cerrar las unidades de máxima seguridad.
Éstas representan un ejemplo de las

condiciones más bárbaras que existen en el
sistema carcelario de EE.UU.

En nuestras presentaciones abordamos el

tema de dichas cárceles rindiéndoles a los
estudiantes testimonios de abusos y
privación sensorial que sufren los presos.

Muchos de los estudiantes reconocieron que
estas condiciones no tendrían ningún
beneficio social cuando los presos salieran

libres.

Muchos estudiantes también reconocieron

paralelos entre sus vidas y las acusaciones

en contra de "pandilleros" que se usan para
meter a gente en las unidades de máxima
seguridad. Un estudiante dijo que sólo

bastaba que tres personas vestidas del mismo
color se juntaran en una esquina para que la
policía los molestara. Muchos otros contaron

que la policía de la ciudad de Oakland siempre
usa violencia excesiva como, por ejemplo, el
apuntar el barril de una pistolas contra la

cabeza de un detenido.

Durante la manifestación subsiguiente, un

invitado retomó este tema mencionando las

leyes contra la vagancia y la holgazanería que
existen en la ciudad de Oakland. Dijo que
estas leyes equivalen a la reacción del estado

frente a la liberación de esclavos africanos
que dio como resultado una creación de una
ola superflua de fuerza laboral desperdiciada

en EE.UU. Una estudiante de la preparatoria
contó que en su escuela ella había sido
castigada de una manera injusta por discutir

temas políticos. Además mencionó el hecho
de que el año pasado el distrito escolar pidió
ayuda al servicio secreto para investigar el

caso de dos estudiantes que habían dicho
que George Bush estaba loco.

Tomando en cuenta las pláticas y las

manifestaciones en las que participamos,
podemos concluir con confianza que esta
semana valió la pena. Apoyamos a los

jóvenes de las naciones oprimidas en
California y respaldamos su demanda de que
el dinero que hoy se usa para mandarlos a la

cárcel se use para educarlos. Como dijimos
en julio en nuestro informe sobre el foro

educativo en Oakland: "El contenido

revolucionario de esta campaña proviene del
carácter de clase de los involucrados.
Pedimos que el dinero no se use para la

represión y que se invierta en las necesidades
básicas"(1).

En nuestro último informe también dijimos

que "el impacto principal de tal campaña sólo
será fuerte en conjunto con nuestros
esfuerzos para que el dinero no sólo se use

de otra forma sino para que también podamos
decidir cómo utilizarlo."

De las más de 200 personas que participaron

en la manifestación en el palacio municipal
de Oakland el día 19 de noviembre, casi todos
venían de dos pequeños colegios

independientes: La Academia de las Calles y
la Escuela para la Justicia Social. Estos
colegios existen dentro del sistema escolar

público pero su organización y currículos son
independientes, como si fueran colegios
"Charter" (colegios que reciben fondos

especiales (estatales) y operan bajo reglas
diferentes a las de los demás colegios del
distrito escolar). Aunque son parte del

sistema estos colegios, sin embargo, parecen
ser una fuente progresista y productiva entre
los estudiantes de Oakland. No sabemos

mucho sobre sus programas, pero los
estudiantes que asistieron a la conferencia y
en particular los que expresaron sus opiniones

desde el escenario, pasaron todo el día
hablando en contra de la violencia policial, el
sistema carcelario y hasta en contra de los

demás colegios del distrito de Oakland.

Los líderes estudiantiles de este

movimiento saben reconocer las relaciones

entre el sistema carcelario, el capitalismo y
cientos de años de opresión. Y casi todos
los estudiantes con los que hablamos

sostienen una opinión negativa sobre el
sistema carcelario. Pero cuando les
preguntamos cuál sería la solución al

problema de crímenes violentos, no supieron
responder. La mayoría opina que los seres
humanos seguirán violando y asesinando y

que así son las cosas. Esto parece ser el
obstáculo mas grande para desencadenar un
poderoso movimiento de jóvenes para

transformar la sociedad. Cuando las Panteras
Negras demostraron que el pueblo podía
llevar a cabo el cambio, el apoyo que

recibieron de su comunidad aumentó
muchísimo. Debemos seguir el ejemplo de
las Panteras Negras para organizar al pueblo

sirviéndole bajo una estrategia que haga
posible un cambio general del sistema.

Fuentes consultadas: 1. MIM Notes 286,

Septiembre 1, 2003.

Las prisiones de Tejas retienen comida, ayuda médica

se aplica la Ley de Herodes: o te chingas o te

jodes.

A los activistas que luchan contra el sistema

carcelario no les sorprende el hecho de que

los recortes presupuestarios sean dirigidos
contra la población más pobre del estado,
pero este hecho debería darnos rabia a todos.

Les pedimos a todos nuestros lectores que
se involucren en nuestras campañas en contra
de las injusticias del sistema carcelario

estadounidense.