Continued Discussion on the Stop Snitching Campaign
i wanted to take this opportunity to lend my voice to this ongoing discussion around so-called “snitching”, as this is a serious topic of principle and ideology which affects Our ability to succeed in Our tactical and strategic approaches.
As MIM(Prisons) pointed out, this question was originally raised due to captives organizing around police terrorism inside prisons and other captives refusal to participate in the paper trail aspect of the resistance. However, the issue raised in ULK 83’s article putting forth the slogan “Stop Collaborating” and the response in ULK 86, “Stop Snitching on Pigs”, need to be discussed as they all derive from the same source and it needs to be spelled out.
The California Prisoner in ULK 86 opens by saying “Let’s look at this from a practical perspective and not from an ideological one.” Then says “Snitching is telling on people. It’s giving information on someone else to a higher authority to act on it. We can all agree on that definition.”
i begin by stating: NO! We cannot all agree on that. It is a fallacy that telling on someone and snitching is always the same. See, snitching necessitates that We’ve had some sort of prior bond, or understanding. If your co-defendant “snitches on you” it is different from the old church lady down the street “telling on you.” It may produce the same result, but these are two different things. And it is indeed an ideological question, We can’t get around that. The co-defendant has an understanding with you, usually an unspoken one that each of you are equally committed to the morals and principles of the criminal subculture, which means no cooperation with law enforcement even if it means saving your own skin. When the co-defendant goes against that they have snitched on you, not only because they told but because they violated your trust by going against a principle each of you swore to uphold. The presence of the betrayal factor and the deceit, the inability to honor a commitment, these are the key factors that represent the phenomenon We call snitching. These are indeed universal principles that virtually no one likes when people go against. Regardless of walk of life, We as humyns want to have assurance that commitments will be honored, that sacrifices will be made, and that trustworthiness will be present in those We associate with. It is for this reason real snitching is universally frowned upon.
However, when We bring the old church lady into the equation, she, while frowning upon the Judas in her bible and those who exhibit those same traits in her world, will tell on you for whatever perceived slight or transgression you’ve committed against her. She hasn’t swore to any principles of the criminal subculture, she has no bond with you other than being a community member, and that bond was broken by you in your antisocial act against her. So she cannot possibly “snitch” on you, even while proceeding to tell on you. There is a significant difference, and We cannot hold people to standards that they have never acknowledged.
As MIM(Prisons) said, abuses must be exposed by so-called authorities and this goes towards undermining the legitimacy of their authority.
A crooked cop is not an ally to a revolutionary prisoner simply because they are crooked or they bring something in. This question has to really be worked out on a case-by-case basis, but i’ll just say that in most cases the crooked cop isn’t an ally and the situation is just transactional, there’s no understanding either way of the intentions behind either the taking or bringing of illicit things: it’s only a transactional relationship like most in a capitalist society. So, to say the pig (the profit-driven crooked cop) is my ally because they bring me phones and dope is to say that i am allowing myself to be bought off by these items. As a NARN i stand on the principles put forth in the FROLINAN Handbook for REVNAT Cadres: Standards 5: “Potential members must have outgrown the lust for coveting things or material goods.” And from the Codes of Conduct 4: “No member of the revolutionary cadre organization will place any material commodity above or before the organization, the people, or the NAIM.” 6: “No member of the revolutionary cadre organization is permitted to use, produce, distribute, process, fund, or take part in the sale of heroin, cocaine (in any form), LSD, PCP, or any hard drug, nor will they take any pill for the purpose of getting high and no member will distribute such pills or take part in the sale of such pills or other illegal drugs.”
i share to illustrate the standards and codes of conduct We should be upholding, even when no one else is, or even when it benefits Us to do otherwise. So if We follow this as spelled out it would limit Our dealings with that crooked pig anyway. We have a mandate to liberate political prisoners and if they believe in the principles of the revolutionary movement, then maybe that rare individual is an ally. But We all know there aren’t many who are willing to put their life and freedom on the line to liberate Us, even if they’re willing to help Us saturate the pen with distractions. So this says “i am willing, as a crooked pig who is profit driven, to help you distract yourself and others while in prison, but i am not willing to help you get out of prison.” i don’t think that’s a real ally and it’s because of the profit motive itself.
This brings me to my next point. The California Prisoner uses the terminology that We all use. “Our struggle.” But i think We need to define exactly what “Our struggle” means to us, because it doesn’t mean the same thing to everyone at all times. Some think the struggle is for power and influence within the prison, some think it’s to tear down all prisons right now, some think it’s to reform the criminal mentality in order to produce good law abiding citizens of the corporate states of amerika and all these and other trends coexist to make up what Our struggle objectively is, but what is Our struggle subjectively, to Us? The Dragon pointed this out the best when it was said, that the whole point of the prison movement, the underlying motive for all the actions is to develop the capacity to field a People’s Army. i am paraphrasing. So in my experience, and something i lament to cats around although i can’t speak for cats here or elsewhere, but those who have “plugs” are not using them for any sort of dissent activities. Those who have plugs and dope are usually those policing the cats doing the dissident actions, whether those actions are paper trial related or organizing direct action.
Rarely is it the cats who have plugs and dope doing anything for the movement, and even when these are comrades with knowledge and experience and proven track records of struggle, while they have access to those plugs and dope their activism and commitment to it either ceases or severely lessens. Why? Because these are not only distractions but are corrupting influences. It is no coincidence that usually the prisons with the least amount of “motion” are those with the highest level of rebel activity and ideological training going on. So although plugs could theoretically be used for a lot of good they are by and large not being used in that way. [MIM(Prisons) adds: This is our experience as well.]
So, while I would agree with the Cali Prisoner about not throwing the baby out with the bath water, i do so largely because We cannot do so anyway. The prison system creates its black market economy through its laws of prohibition. Therefore there will always be some pig somewhere itching to take advantage of the unique economic opportunity to provide distractions and corrupting influences to those that want them and want to provide them. i am not advocating telling on crooked cops, but let me be clear they’re not allies to revolutionary prisoners, unless they themselves support the revolutionary principles We uphold. Let me also be clear that those who decide to tell on these crooked cops, here meaning specifically those who are driven by profit, those acts are not snitching, even though they are telling as explained at the top of this writing.
The two main things that hold the revolutionary prison movement back are gangs/gang mentalities and the drug trade. Therefore, anyone who perpetuates the latter is holding back the movement. On the gang question, there are those who are solid revs and come from this cloth, i am one of them. However, this doesn’t change the fact that the introduction of and expansion of gangs, particularly street gangs inside prison, at least in the case of Texas, coincides with the downward slope of revolutionary consciousness and commitment within the walls.
Gone are the days where L.O.’s are built upon revolutionary and progressive principles. Gone are the days of traditional groups spreading knowledge and going at the system. They’re only spreading dope, gangsterism, and discord amongst each other. The exceptions to this rule become obsolete within their groups, and the revolutionary prisoners who really stand on revolutionary bizzness are not the cool cats with all the luxuries, they’re usually the ones outcast, not liked, shunned, isolated, because everyone wants to be crime bosses in here. In order to bring the proper orientation and programs back to the prisons, revolutionary and progressive prisoners have to make allies and build up institutions to help those who need and want it. It won’t be too many who want it, and that’s just the sad and true reality we’re in these days. Capitalism + dope = genocide.
These MF’ers are preventing us from building the People’s Army and We are talking about protecting them and their interests and that they are allies? Come on homie, what wrong with that picture!?
In the history of the prison movement the most effective tactic of changing conditions has been inmate litigation. In order to litigate you must create a paper trail. How can we do that if we are not filing any complaints? i encourage comrades, those who live by revolutionary codes of conduct to be mindful of exactly how you implore the enemy institutions. Not because it is or isn’t snitching, but because, again, Our point is to build a People’s Army and We still have to do that even though We complain about the reactionary notions a lot of Our peers have, these are still the peers We have to organize with and among, and therefore like any shrewd politician We must be mindful of the landscape and the dominant ideologies and ideals, even those we disagree with, and navigate the terrain in a way that doesn’t neutralize Our effectiveness at organizing people under Our umbrella. We won’t be able to build the army if they all distrust Us because they think we are snitches. We won’t even have the time or space to argue otherwise because credibility has been lost.
For this reason, it is not politically correct to tell internal affairs on the crooked pig about profit driven acts, whereas documenting acts of pig brutality where people can see and understand the negative intentions behind the pig’s actions and therefore are less likely to side with the pig against you either directly or ideologically, that is an action that is politically correct. Be mindful comrades, and stay focused on the ultimate objective. Don’t snitch, and i mean really snitch (betray you honor and commitments) and don’t collaborate with the state.
