ULK 44 is On Point with Revolutionary Science
Every article in ULK 44 is on point! “Baltimore: Contradictions Heightening” leaves me hoping there are boots on the ground to guide the demonstrators into an organized resistance. It seems from historical examples that destruction of property and forcible removal of merchandise gets results, e.g. Rodney King, whereas candles and prayer obtain imperialistic praise, e.g. Trayvon Martin in Florida. When a kkkapitalist suffers economic harm, imperialist forces will crush a few of their own thug enforcers to restore the facade of calm. Destroy the property of the bourgeoisie and the killers of oppressed citizens get arrested.
Loco1’s article on the sovereign citizen movement does much to dispel myth and urban legend. But often the hope of fallacy is stronger than the cold fist of truth. Recently a rumor has spread that prisoners may file a 42 USC 1983 petition for just $35 if they tell the clerk to “file it in the green file without the protection of admiralty law.” Even though I’ve shown men an order from a magistrate judge, and a letter from the court clerk, both stating $400 is the filing fee ($350 if in forma pauperis is granted), prisoners still insist they only have to pay $35. I even showed them an order denying a prisoner’s request to “file his petition for $35.”
As for the sovereign citizen rubbish, it is historical fact that even when a legal remedy does provide liberation, the supreme court of the united snakes devises methods to make it inapplicable to the oppressed. Look up Dred Scott. Consider that “a prison inmate … is not an employee within the meaning of the [Federal Labor Standards Act].”(1) Does anyone honestly believe that an imperialist court of pig justices would uphold the sovereign citizen argument? Even if the argument was rooted in sound legal principles (and your articles shows it is not), the imperialist powers in the court are not going to say the government that empowered them is a fraud and void.
And
Rashid
is incorrect, especially on the subject of the labor aristocracy. First,
MIM’s definition can be validated by simply engaging in discussion with
prison staff, including teachers. Those people do not identify with the
workers in other nations. Recently a teacher told me that his gas prices
should be lower because “Iraq owes us their oil in exchange for our
blood in liberating them.” When I replied that I don’t recall any Iraqis
ever asking us to invade their country and plunge it into civil war, he
said, “You only hear what you want to hear.” I was also informed it is
fair for a factory worker in India to earn 46 cents an hour because
“Amerikkka and England built that country for them.” Really? And second,
just because members of revolutionary groups are possibly from bourgeois
or aristocratic backgrounds, it does NOT mean those groups as a whole
will support revolution. But neither does it automatically exclude one
from the fight. There were Germans who fought against the nazis. And
Americans who fought for the bastards.