The San Francisco BayView newspaper has outed their former
editor Keith Washington as an informant and a manipulator. Previous
editor Mary Ratcliff has reasonably posed that this could have been an
FBI operation to undermine the BayView. Yet, Washington’s brief
stint as editor after being released from prison, followed by relapse
into addiction and violence also seems consistent with someone who has
jumped from group to group driven by eir own self-interest.
Keith Washington, aka Comrade Malik, was a politically eclectic,
self-promoting prison activist. It is for those reasons that his
passions often did not overlap with the program of MIM(Prisons), despite
being in close contact for many years. During eir time in prison,
Washington was a regular reader of ULK, MIM Theory and
other literature we distribute on the Black Panthers and Maoism in
general. For years ey could not receive ULK because of TDCJ
censors, so we had to mail em select articles separately.
We are not saying we did not work with Washington, for we published
dozens of articles and reports by em while ey was in prison. Most were
reports on conditions in Texas prisons. For a quick minute, ey was even
part of the the USW Council, but was quickly removed for openly
disagreeing with MIM(Prisons)’s 6 main points. The reason they were even
considered for the position was that it was hard to pin down eir
political line.
Washington seemed to work tirelessly to expose the corruption and
abuses within the Texas Department of Criminal Justice(TDCJ) – though ey
often did so from an angle that seemed to believe in the system. This
approach conflicted with eir initial focoist tendencies when we first
encountered Washington and ey seemed to believe that we were too
hesitant to use arms. Later eir politics hinted at patriotism. For much
of the time ey worked with USW ey also was working with the New Afrikan
Black Panther Party - Prison Chapter, ideologically led by Tom Big
Warrior and Kevin “Rashid” Johnson at the time. At one point Washington
was the Deputy Chairman of NABPP, but ey never was consistent at
upholding NABPP line. Ey went back and forth on the labor aristocracy
question in an opportunist way that seemed to be attempting to please
MIM(Prisons) with one message and Rashid with another. But communication
with Rashid was much more difficult than with us, so ey seemed to lean
towards us at times; another example of opportunism over political line.
This also showed there was no effective democratic centralism within the
NABPP. This is why we say you cannot be part of a democratic centralist
formation while encapsulated by the state, except perhaps in an
organization within a prison where you can freely interact with other
members of the formation.
While Washington pledged eir allegiance to MIM and the NABPP,
overtime ey branched out into other forums and organizations, always
promoting the persona of “Comrade Malik”. Despite all the articles we
did print by em, there were many more we did not, or we had to cut down
significantly due to the self-promotion.
We must learn to recognize political opportunism. We should not be
surprised that someone with such a history would also opportunistically
lie to the pigs to earn favors.
At best, political eclecticism is a sign of immaturity; an immaturity
that cannot be trusted with leadership. This is not to say we do not
work with younger people or people who are still learning, far from it.
We just must recognize their role. But when someone has spent a decade
or more studying revolutionary literature, and they are still putting
forth eclecticism, or just straight reformism, then it is clear they are
not a revolutionary, and perhaps they can play a role better somewhere
else. If we cannot convince such people to follow our leadership, then
we must work harder to prove our effectiveness.
Eclecticism is always connected to forms of subjectivity and
idealism. They are thinking about what feels good to them or
feels right to them. Combine this with the self-promotion of
“Comrade Malik” and you have a risky individual who will probably bounce
from one group to another, one line to another to serve eir own
self-interests, leaving havoc in eir wake. This is no longer immaturity,
but a conscious self-interest.
In our introductory study course we go over the question of how to
implement an effective security program for your organization. This
example of Washington is a good demonstration of how political line was
applied by MIM(Prisons) to keep a potential wrecker from playing a more
damaging role. We would say the work Washington contributed to the pages
of ULK served the people, as it was done under our leadership.
We did not allow Washington’s self-promotion or right opportunism to
take away from the mission of ULK or United Struggle from
Within. For organizations that look for the charismatic individuals to
promote, this is a danger.
We must also recognize that addiction to chemical substances,
violence and criminal behavior plagues the lumpen. The transformation of
the lumpen into proletarian revolutionaries is an arduous and life-long
task. Even those who have seemed to overcome for years while imprisoned,
will often relapse with the dramatic changes and pressures of being
released to the free world. That is why we have developed a
Revolutionary 12 Step Program that takes the proven techniques
of the steps, as applied by the lumpen masses in California, and
reframes them to include the transformation to the proletarian
mentality. It is the constant struggle to submit our self-interest to
the interests of the Third World proletariat that can solidify our own
transformation from addiction to action that changes society.
Imperialism has addicted us all, especially in this consumerist society
in the United $tates.
Our leaders must be forged in a disciplined revolutionary
organization built on democratic centralism. They must exhibit
self-sacrifice and embody the interests of the Third World proletariat.
We cannot follow the bourgeois individualist approach to leadership that
decides elections and celebrity in this country. We must put politics in
command when developing relationships with new comrades and bringing
them into our circles. Some people may never exceed a supporter role,
and that is okay, we welcome their support. Being around longer, having
connections or resources, or being energetic is not enough to qualify
comrades to lead. A consistent practice that upholds the correct line is
how we must judge who is to be trusted with responsibilities and
leadership roles.
note: Nube
Brown, 3 November 2021, Was the Bay View Infiltrated by a ‘rock star’
informant?