MIM(Prisons) is a cell of revolutionaries serving the oppressed masses inside U.$. prisons, guided by the communist ideology of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.
www.prisoncensorship.info is a media institution run by the Maoist Internationalist Ministry of Prisons. Here we collect and publicize reports of conditions behind the bars in U.$. prisons. Information about these incidents rarely makes it out of the prison, and when it does it is extremely rare that the reports are taken seriously and published. This historical record is important for documenting patterns of abuse, and also for informing people on the streets about what goes on behind the bars.
Queen D.I.V.A here, I want to speak on why LGBTQ (Lesbian, Gay,
Bisexual, Transgender/transexual, Queer) comrades are treated like shit.
This is my second bid and I’ve seen a lot of love towards my community
but to be totally honest I’ve seen more dislike and hate towards my
community.
Comrades will rather be respectful to a kkkorektions officer than a
homosexual, why? Comrades will rather say good morning with a smile on
their faces to a kkkorektions officer, why? Don’t you guys know these
pigs are the ones throwing your mail away and then telling you that you
didn’t get any, that they will beat your ass and say you assaulted them
and give you a new bid, and that they will deny your visit after your
family just drove 7 hours to see you?
What have LGBTQ comrades done to you? Nothing. We were born different,
that’s it! What if your own flesh and blood son came to you one day and
confessed that he’s gay? Would you disown him? Would you treat him like
you treat imprisoned gays, or would you put your ego, pride and fear to
the side and embrace him?
We are all in this struggle together, let us say “screw what people
think.” A “unit” is something that works together. We’re behind these
walls and fences together so why can’t we stand together? Stop
disrespecting us and you’ll see we’re not your enemies.
MIM(Prisons) responds: This comrade eloquently pushes the United
Front for Peace in Prisons principle of Unity around the question
of sexual orientation and gender identity, elements of the strand of
oppression of gender. We need to look beyond petty differences, and
beyond socialized prejudices around gender. Our movement cannot afford
to be divided along these lines. Instead we need to judge people by
their actions and their political line. Those who side with the pigs,
who feed them information, and who help them by provoking fights and
doing their bidding: those people are our enemies. People who stand up
against the criminal injustice system are our friends. And those who
don’t stand up but refuse to work with the pigs are our friends in need
of a little educating and leadership so that they too will join the
struggle.
I’m writing your office regarding the problems I and other inmates are
experiencing here at California State Prison - Los Angeles County
(CSP-LAC) with this Corrections Officer (C/O) named T. Hasley. This C/O
is the type of C/O Brother George Jackson was talking about. The one who
walks around the prison with a little rules book in his ass pocket. This
MF just come out my cell, he search my cell like everyday in retaliation
and conspiring. I have written to the warden, the administration
regarding this C/O and the problem I’m experiencing with this C/O. This
issue continues to escalate.
Friday I was at a 602 hearing about this C/O lying about my (6) cubic ft
of property and the 1 extra cubic ft allowed for legal paper work. This
C/O came in my cell five minutes after the legal search to retaliation,
so I got at his supervisor about the problem. His supervisor became very
agitated once he was faced with several issues causec by C/O T. Hasley’s
intentional stupidity. Sgt M Fernardo had refused to address the matter
and deliberately condones it. By stating I’m not getting in the middle
of T. Hasley issue, I have better things to do.
From approximately 7:45 A.M. on 6/1/2016 to 10:10 A.M. no correctional
lieutenants were summoned by unit staff. No report was made to the
supervisor about failure to let me out for recreation. He also try to
get me to snitch for him. That’s what started the problem, I would not
snitch for him. I have filed numerous complaints. Unfortunately I have
been incarcerated within this department for several years. What the
problem seems to be from my viewpoint is that due to my SNY status, I’m
not afforded the same respect or dignity one would experience if housed
within general population. I won’t bore you with the number of incidents
in which I personally have been disrespected by staff due to my current
placement. There is no doubt that this same attitude prevails outside
the ranks of custody, retaliation seems to be the norm for standing up
and asking only for what we are guaranteed by due process and following
the rules and regulations. I strongly believe that without some sort of
intervention, I believe this C/O will keep up his wrongful acts. You
know CDC convenient tactic. Like we all know they have been using it for
years and it will not change at all.
Here’s one example of a female officer with the last name of Paramore. A
guy goes up to the front of the dorm and pushes the intercom to the
officers station. His last name is Welch and he’s handicapped (having
one leg) and in a wheelchair. The officer asks what he wants and he says
he can’t breath. After getting out of the dormitory another inmate asked
CO Paramore if he should push him in his wheelchair to medical. She
states: “No, he can push himself.” He makes it to medical (with some
assistance) and a nurse asks him “what’s your problem?” Well, if he
could’ve answered he would’ve said, “Who? Me? My problem is: I’m dead.”
Yes, he died. Ms. Paramore doesn’t work in our dormitory anymore - but
she’s still working and in another housing unit.
And by the way, I had to go to confinement and now I know what Pelican
Bay torture is like. The officers there went by clicking, beeping, and
closing doors there every 25-30 minutes! So, I feel for y’all in Pelican
Bay.
This is regarding the residential drug abuse program (RDUP)
psychological brainwashing. I am reporting from USP Coleman 2. The RDUP
have many elements of brainwashing. The use of superficial trivia to get
the prisoners to go along with the program. Political rituals like the
group recital of slogans. Workbooks to encourage prisoners to help the
police with fulfulling the agendas of the state. Rules that make the
prisoner avoid the subjects that have anything to do with the true cause
of crime: capitalism/imperialism. The use of prisoner snitches to keep
tabs on other prisoners. All the staff are low-level employees that
justify their employment by the existence of the programs that do
nothing but waste money. All prisoners are being profiled for any
anti-government views and will be subjected to punishment for any
statement. The supervisors have a direct connection with law enforcement
on the streets and benefit from the status quo. A large number of
prisoners at Coleman are all gang/lumpen organization member defectors
and are now at the mercy of the U.S. government.
Brothas and Sistas, as freedom fighters we must stay ready every day to
act, for we might be called to duty to support and protect our brothas
and sistas in our struggle. In the revolutionary units it’s mandatory we
get our military on. Getting our military on is exercising because we
are units with a People’s Army.
We must train our body for endurance, stamina and strength. Run long
distance and sprints around a track. Do pushups, pull ups, sit ups,
squats, lunges and cardio like burpies, windmills, jumping jacks, etc.
When getting our military on work out at least 30 min to 1 hour every
day. Then during the day do little 5 to 15 minute workouts to keep heart
rate up. Sometimes I do a routine every time a commercial comes on TV if
I’m watching a program or when I’m ready I will do a routine after I
read a page. This is how I stay war ready.
We must not only watch what we feed our mind we must watch what we feed
our body and the food portion size we put in our body. We encourage
people not to eat pork. People can eat beef, lamb, fish and chicken. We
recommend eating fruit and vegetables. Cut back or limit pasta, white
bread, white rice, candy and cake intake. Eat plenty of nuts like
peanuts, sunflower seeds, almonds, cashews.
The revolutionary must build revolutionary minds by studying history and
resistance movements, study our environment as in how people act, their
different characters, study or pay attention to world events and we
study our ancestors’ and leaders’ legacies, which are instructions we
use to benefit us in this day and time. We build off of them. We study
our experiences on what works and don’t work for certain situations,
times and places. This way we know how to continue to move forward and
not get stagnated. We focus on actions, building programs and
kampaigning to spread the revolutionary kulture. Actions speak louder
than words so let our actions speak for us whenever we see oppression
being done to us by our common enemy.
MIM(Prisons) responds: This is a good follow up to Under Lock
& Key 49, which focused on survival and stamina. This writer has
some good suggestions for building a strong body and mind. Using
activities like television and reading to provide timed exercise breaks,
and maintaining a healthy diet are very good suggestions. Of course we
know that many comrades in prison have little control over their diet,
but when possible it is always good to eat the healthiest foods
available.
We are not in agreement with the position that people should not eat
pork but should eat other meats. There is no scientific evidence that
pork is less healthy than beef and lamb, for instance. Perhaps this
suggestion is related to a religious belief, but as materialists we
focus on material benefit of foods rather than spiritual doctrines.
All revolutionary comrades should build their own routine of exercise
and diet to help maintain the strongest possible mind and body behind
bars. This is part of our responsibility to survive and stay active
during this protracted battle against imperialism.
On 18 May between 9 and 9:30 a.m. I was being taken out of my cell in
confinement, to be seen for a medical check up. I was handcuffed by
officer Smith and along side him was officer Horn. Now as the door
rolled open, I stepped out of my cell and immediately turned to officer
Smith and asked him would he please escort me downstairs instead of
officer Horn, who in the past I and other inmates have had problems
with.
At this time officer Horn reached out his right arm, roughly grabbed me
by my arm and snatched me away from officer Smith and said “I don’t have
time for this bullshit.” Then he started pushing me towards the front of
the top tier while repeatedly banging me up against the wall and all
doors as we went along.
Officer Horn became more and more aggressive as we neared the cat walk
in wing II, and at the same time I was calling officer Smith to please
come get me before we get to the stairs and something bad happens.
Officer Horn kept his aggressiveness up as I tried to keep my balance
and telling him to stop hurting me. Officer Horn then got by the cat
walk, took out another set of cuffs, and hit me on the top of the head
with them. After he did that he threw me in between the top tier rails
and attempted to throw me over the top tier, which would have possibly
killed me. I told him to stop!
He then called sergeant Blue, the dorm sergeant, and he came and got me
and took me downstairs to see medical. I have filed an informal
grievance to the warden. I told my mental health counselor Mr. Brodrick
who I believe said something but was told to keep quiet. They have been
trying to keep this on the hush! I had captain Ford come to my cell last
week and he asked me about the things I wrote on a sick call paper
pertaining to what I’m telling you now. He asked me about what happened,
date and time and I told him it was all on the paper he was holding. He
said he was going to review the camera and if I was lying he was going
to write me a DR [disciplinary report] for lying to staff. Well, he
never came back so I guess he saw for himself what I said was true. They
are trying to hide this. And I know they saw the cameras cause they
didn’t even write me a DR and no one has talked to me yet.
As we reflect on the legacy of the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense
(BPP), we are reminded that the struggle for national liberation
continues. Fifty years ago, the Panthers emerged from similar conditions
of national oppression to what we face today. Armed with Maoism and the
gun, Panther leaders Huey P. Newton and Bobby Seale set out to organize
their Oakland community against police brutality and other social
inequalities. And what they accomplished distinguished the BPP as the
greatest revolutionary organization in the hystory of the New
Afrikan/Black liberation struggle.
During its height, the BPP established itself as the vanguard of the
revolutionary movement in the United $tates. Revisionists try to paint
the Panthers as simple nationalists who only wanted to improve their
community. But hystory proves otherwise, because the Panthers’
revolutionary work went beyond the Serve the People programs they
implemented. The BPP was a Maoist party which criticized the bankrupt
ideas of cultural nationalism and Black capitalist reforms. They
attacked revisionism in the Soviet Union, while offering troops to
support the Vietnamese in their struggle to push out the Amerikan
invaders, and upholding the progress of the Great Proletarian Cultural
Revolution in China. It understood that the relationship between the
Euro-Amerikan settler nation and the many oppressed nations internal to
the United $tates was (as it still is today) defined by
semi-colonialism, and that national liberation was the only path
forward. To this end, the Panthers formed strategic alliances and
coalitions that broadened their mass base of support and unity.
Eventually they succeeded in forming Panther chapters in virtually every
major city, precipitating a revolutionary movement of North American
oppressed nations vying for national liberation.
Despite this progress the BPP made serious mistakes, mistakes that
arguably set the movement for national liberation back tremendously.
Even though the Panther leadership adhered to Marxism-Leninism-Maoism
(MLM), they failed to assess the changing landscape of social and
political conditions, which inevitably led them to take up focoist
positions. This error in analysis resulted in security issues as
repression from the U.$. reactionary forces intensified. With J. Edgar
Hoover’s plan to destabilize and neutralize the revolutionary movement
underway, the Panther leadership continued to promote a “cult of
persynality” around Newton instead of democratic centralism.
Consequently, these mistakes placed such intense pressure on the party
that it was unable to overcome the tide of repression.
Ultimately, the point of this article is to honor the revolutionary
legacy of the BPP by demonstrating how the Panther practice is relevant
to our current struggle. For our national liberation struggles to gain
traction we must learn from the successes and failures of the most
advanced revolutionary organization in U.$. hystory.
Fuck the Police!
“The Party was born in a particular time and place. It came into being
with a call for self-defense against the police who patrolled our
communities and brutalized us with impunity.”(1) – Huey P. Newton
There is no greater tragedy for the oppressed nation community than the
unjust murder of one of its own at the hands of the pigs. The impact is
two-fold. On one hand, police brutality demonstrates to members of the
oppressed nation community that there are two sets of rules governing
society, one for the oppressor and one for the oppressed. On the other
hand, it removes all doubt from the minds of oppressed nationals that
their lives are virtually worthless in the eyes of the white power
structure.
This point was just as much a sobering reality during the Panther era as
it is for us today. In The Black Panthers Speak, Phillip S. Foner
cites a 1969 report that captured a snapshot of the police relations
with the Oakland community. It read in part:
“…for the black citizens, the policeman has long since ceased to be – if
indeed he ever was – a neutral symbol of law and order…in the ghetto
disorders of the past few years, blacks have often been exposed to
indiscriminate police assaults and, not infrequently, to gratuitous
brutality…Many ghetto blacks see the police as an occupying army…”(2)
Under these circumstances, the BPP was formed and began to transform the
Oakland community in a revolutionary manner.(3) Newton and Seale
understood that the terrorist actions by the pigs undermined the
oppressed nation community’s ability to improve its conditions. So they
organized armed patrols to observe and discourage improper police
behavior. These unprecedented actions by the Panthers gave them
credibility within the community, particularly as community members
experienced the positive effects brought about by the patrols.
Therefore, when the Panthers engaged in mass activities, such as the
Free Breakfast for Children program, they did so with the full support
of the community.
Naturally, the BPP met resistance from the local and state reactionary
forces. Challenging the Gestapo tactics of the pigs and building
institutions that served the needs of the oppressed was seen as too much
of a threat by and to the white power structure. But the revolutionary
movement had already picked up steam, and, given the momentous energy
and support from the anti-war movement, it was not about to be derailed.
It was upon this platform that the BPP spoke to the oppressed nations
across the United $tates and saw its message resonate and take root
within the consciousness of all oppressed peoples.
Today, we face the same challenge. Whether it’s the pig murder of Denzil
Dowell that mobilized the Panthers into action fifty years ago, or the
more recent pig murder of Jamar Clark this past November, there has been
no significant change in the conditions of national oppression that U.$.
internal semi-colonies are subjected to.
Police brutality continues to keep the oppressed nations from addressing
a system of national oppression and semi-colonialism. But there is an
even more sinister dynamic involved today. Mass incarceration, and the
“War on Drugs” and “War on Crime” rhetoric and policies that fuel it,
further divides the oppressed nation community against itself. With the
lumpen section of these oppressed nation communities criminalized and
incarcerated so too is the revolutionary potential for national
liberation neutralized and restrained. Here, the Panther practice
provides a blueprint for our current struggle in respect to
revolutionary organizing.
Recently, we have seen the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement come into
being in response to the unbridled pig terrorism that occurs across U.$.
oppressed nation communities. So the basis for revolutionary organizing
against the current system exists. Nonetheless, BLM is a reformist
organization that advocates for integration and not liberation. What we
need are Maoist revolutionary organizations – organizations that seek to
build the political consciousness of oppressed nationals through mass
activities and proletarian leadership similar to the Panther practice.
Maoism, not Focoism
Maoism demands that in determining correct revolutionary practice we
must first proceed from an analysis of contradictions. This means that
we must identify the contradiction that is principal to our situation,
and then assess its internal aspects as well as its external
relationships. In contrast, focoism “places great emphasis on armed
struggle and the immediacy this brings to class warfare!”(4) Where
Maoism takes account of the national question in its entirety and pushes
the struggle for national liberation forward according to the prevailing
conditions, focoism seeks to bring about favorable conditions for
national liberation (or revolution) through the actions of a small band
of armed individuals. To date Maoism has informed many successful
people’s wars; focoism, on the other hand, has mostly made the prospect
for revolution much less likely.
In this regard, Newton, in developing the Panther practice, saw the
international situation of the time as favorable to revolutionary
organizing within the United $tates. Given the hystoric Great
Proletarian Cultural Revolution in China representing the furthest
advancement toward communism to this day, the national liberation wars
of Afrika and Asia dealing blows to imperialism, and the Vietnam War
stoking the fire of discontent and rebellion among sections of the white
oppressor nation, Newton was correct in organizing and politicizing U.$.
oppressed nation communities for liberation.
Bloom and Martin explain in their book, Black Against Empire,
that these conditions, in particular the anti-war movement, assisted the
Panthers’ organizing efforts greatly.(5) This coalition between the
Panthers and the Peace movement was so dynamic that U.$. veterans
returning from Vietnam joined the BPP and other revolutionary
organizations. The link between Vietnamese liberation and New Afrikan
liberation (and other U.$. oppressed nation liberation struggles) became
a central point in building political consciousness.
Nonetheless, Newton took eir analysis too far. It is clear that ey
believed the armed struggles abroad were inextricably tied to the U.$.
national liberation struggles. Newton maintained, “As the aggression of
the racist American government escalates in Vietnam, the police agencies
of America escalates the repression of Black people throughout the
ghettos of America.”(6) From this standpoint, Newton assumed that the
police brutality in U.$. oppressed communities created a military
situation, to which a military response from the U.$. revolutionary
movement was appropriate.
Newton’s error was mistaking the weakness of imperialism abroad as
indicative of a weak U.$. imperialist state. Instead of assessing the
changing landscape of social and political conditions, created by a
period of concessions by U.$. imperialists, the Panthers continued to
organize as if the stage of struggle was an armed one.(7) Even when
Newton recognized the dramatic changes and began to adapt, a split
occurred within the Party, as a faction held that revolution was
imminent.(8)
With respect to our current struggle, we are in the stage of building
public opinion and independent institutions of the oppressed. In this
work we must establish a united front of all those who can be united
against imperialism.
Therefore, when we see the
Ferguson
or
Baltimore
protests against pig terrorism descend into scenes of mayhem and
senseless violence we must criticize these methods of resistance. Many
of the individuals who engage in these spontaneous uprisings mistakenly
believe that this will bring about some change or vindicate the wrongs
done to them and their community. The only thing these focoist actions
change, however, is the focus from pig terrorism to people terrorizing
their own community. This basically undermines our ability to organize
and build public opinion in this stage of struggle.
Part of this problem lies in the fact that there is no revolutionary
organization at this time representing these oppressed nation
communities. There is no BPP or Young Lords Party going into these
communities and doing agitation and organizing work. As a result, a lack
of political consciousness prevails among these communities,
underscoring the need for a revolutionary organization.
A Maoist party would guide the U.$. oppressed nations with a concrete
revolutionary practice and strategy. This revolutionary organization
would use MLM study and analysis to determine the correct actions and
methods to take in order to liberate those oppressed nations and avoid
the pitfalls of focoism.
Ultimately, this lesson can be summed up in one sentence: “Maoism warns
that taking up the gun too soon, without the proper support of the
masses, will result in fighting losing battles.”(9)
On the Necessity of Security Culture
Furthermore, the Panthers’ incorrect analysis of conditions that led to
focoist positions eventually compromised the security of the Party as
well. Once the period of concessions began to sap support for the BPP’s
militant posture, FBI head J. Edgar Hoover was able to ratchet up
repression against the Panthers. This was seen most clearly when agent
provocateurs were able to infiltrate and exploit the focoist tendencies
held by some Panthers. Undercover FBI agents would literally join the
BPP and begin to incite other members to engage in criminal activities
or “make revolution.” These repressive measures, their ever-increasing
frequency and intensity, began to take a detrimental toll on the
Panthers.
Make no mistake, since day one of the BPP’s organizing efforts it faced
repression. Armed New Afrikan men and wimmin organizing their community
toward revolutionary ends was intolerable for the white power structure.
However, the anti-war movement created such a favorable climate for
revolutionary organizing that the more reactionary forces attacked the
BPP, the more support the Panthers received, the more its membership
grew and its chapters spread throughout the country.
But when those favorable conditions shifted, the BPP’s strategy didn’t.
The Panthers continued to operate above ground, maintaining the same
militant posture that initially placed them in the crosshairs of
Hoover’s COINTELPRO. Ironically, Newton was well versed in the role of
the Leninist vanguard party. Ey explained that “All real revolutionary
movements are driven underground.”(10) Though, by the time Newton put
this principle into action and attempted to adapt to the changing
situation the Party as a whole was thoroughly divided and beaten down by
wave after wave of relentless repression.
For us, the important point to draw from this lesson is the assessment
of conditions for revolutionary organizing. Because we live in a point
in time where we consume our daily social lives openly through various
social media, it is easy to forget that the reactionaries are observing.
We must therefore place a high priority on security culture as it
pertains to our organizing efforts going forward. In addition, we must
strongly emphasize the importance of avoiding death and prison. A robust
security culture will protect our organizing efforts and dull the blows
of repression that are certain to come.
Currently, we face a strong imperialist state that is more than capable
of disrupting a potential revolutionary movement. This point is
evidenced by the fact that Hoover’s repressive practices are “mirrored
in the far-reaching high-tech surveillance of the US National Security
Agency.”(11) Maintaining a strong revolutionary organization thus
requires us to maintain strong security practices informed by MLM theory
and practice.
Party Discipline over Party Disciple
Hystory is a testament that some revolutionary organizations and
movements have fallen victim to the “cult of persynality.” This is more
true in an imperialist society as bourgeois individualism nurtures a
response in people to associate or reduce organizations and movements to
the characteristics of one persyn. And the BPP was no exception in this
regard.
Newton
was very intelligent, charismatic, and embodied qualities of a true
leader. In truth, ey was a symbol of black power and strength that had
been missing from the New Afrikan nation for centuries. The militant
image that Newton projected was undeniably magnetic and a source of
inspiration for U.$. oppressed nations.
Yet, the BPP relied too heavily on Newton as an individual leader and
not enough on the party as a whole. Eir ideological insights and
theoretical contributions were unmatched within the party. And to a
certain extent this was a weakness of the party. Newton was the primary
source of oxygen to the party whereas other members of leadership didn’t
meet the demands that the revolutionary movement required of the party.
Bloom and Martin hint at this cult of persynality around Newton, arguing
“In late 1971… Hilliard recalls that Newton was surrounded by loyalists
who applauded Newton’s every action, challenged nothing, and would do
anything to win his approval.”(12) For example, when Newton was
imprisoned on the bogus pig murder charges, the BPP adapted its struggle
and practice toward the “Free Huey” movement. Even Eldridge Cleaver, who
was one of those members of leadership that reneged on eir revolutionary
principles, criticized this move that ultimately confused mass work with
party work. The oppressed masses began to associate the party and the
Panthers with freeing Newton and not liberating themselves. The BPP had
let its practice become dictated by Newton who was for the most part
disconnected from the people and community because of eir imprisonment.
The Panthers should have developed a strong party discipline, one based
on democratic centralism. Democratic centralism means that any decisions
that the party makes is debated and discussed through a democratic
process. Even if party members do not agree with the decisions, they
must support them in public. This ensures that the party maintains unity
in the face of reactionary forces. Those party members who are still in
disagreement with the decision have the opportunity to utilize the
democratic process of the party and make their case. Overall, this
strengthens the theoretical basis of the party and does not allow one
persyn to hijack it or undermine it.
The thrust of this lesson is not to discourage party members from
developing leadership. The revolutionary movement will certainly need
all the leaders, in whatever role or capacity, which the struggle for
national liberation demands. But the point is the importance of party
discipline. Because as we see with the Panther practice many of the
major mistakes stemmed from not maintaining party discipline. Democratic
centralism would have promoted the space and opportunity for members to
challenge and question decisions by Newton. And as members engaged in
this process they would have developed their theoretical practice,
shouldering some of the load that Newton, even while imprisoned, had to
bear.
This is not to say that the Panthers would not have made mistakes. But
with the same party discipline that saw the Bolsheviks lead the
successful Russian Revolution of 1917 or the Chinese Communist Party
execute at a high level throughout the many stages of its liberation
struggle, surely the Panthers could have avoided the divisions that were
largely fomented by FBI interference. In addition, proper application of
democratic centralism should have led to the distinction between party
cadre and mass organizations to take on campaigns like “Free Huey” and
doing the support work to run Panther programs. Such a distinction would
have helped prevent the decline of the Oakland-based party into
reformism as conditions changed.
What our current struggle does not need is a party disciple or some
demagogue who is proclaimed our savior. What will liberate the U.$.
oppressed nation is a Maoist revolutionary organization connected and
related to the masses. Consolidating the mass line is a necessary part
of applying democratic centralism within the Party.
Conclusion
We are at a critical point in the hystory of U.$. national liberation
struggles. No longer can we continue to allow the police to murder us
with impunity or for our communities to exist merely as pathways to
imprisonment. Revolutionary nationalism is needed. And that begins with
relating the thought and struggle of the most advanced revolutionary
organization in U.$. hystory to our current struggle.
This article has highlighted a few mistakes of the BPP. But in no way
does this discard the Panther practice overall. On the contrary, our
path to national liberation has been illumined by the lessons drawn from
the revolutionary legacy of the BPP. It is in this spirit that this
article honors the Black Panther Party, and represents a theoretical
step on that path to liberation.
Uhuru of the Black Riders Liberation Party - Prison Chapter: 2016
marks the 50th anniversary of the founding of the original Black Panther
Party for Self-Defense (BPP) by Dr. Huey P. Newton and Bobby Seale. This
year also marks the 20th anniversary of the founding of the Black Riders
Liberation Party, the New Generation Black Panther Party for
Self-Defense, under the leadership of General T.A.C.O. (Taking All
Capitalists Out).
The original BPP arose out of an immediate need to organize and defend
the New Afrikan (Black) nation against vicious pig brutality that was
taking place during the 1960s and 70s; while at the same time teaching
and showing us through practice how to liberate ourselves from the death
grip of Amerikkkan-style oppression, colonialism and genocide through
its various Serve the People programs.
The Black Riders Liberation Party (BRLP) came about in 1996 when former
Bloods and Crips came together in peace and unity while at the Youth
Training School (a youth gang prison) in Los Angeles. The BRLP, which
follows the historic example set by the original BPP, is a true United
Lumpen Front against pig brutality, capitalism, and all its systems of
oppression.
The political line of the BRLP, as taught by our General, is
Revolutionary Afrikan Inter-communalism, which is an upgraded version of
Huey’s Revolutionary Intercommunalism developed later in the party.
Revolutionary Afrikan Intercommunalism is a form of Pan-Afrikanism and
socialism. This line allows us to link the struggles of New Afrikans
here in the Empire with Afrikans on the continent and in the diaspora.
Thus Revolutionary Afrikan Intercommunalism is, in essence,
revolutionary internationalism as it guides us towards building a United
Front with Afrikan people abroad to overthrow capitalist oppression here
in the United $tates and imperialism around the globe.
Our Black Commune Program is an upgraded version of the original BPP’s
Ten-Point Platform and Program, which includes the demand for treatment
for AIDS victims and an end to white capitalists smuggling drugs into
our communities. [The Black Commune Program also adds a point on
ecological destruction as it relates to the oppressed. -MIM(Prisons)]
Mao recognized, as did Che, that every revolutionary organization should
have its own political organ – a newspaper – to counter the
psychological warfare campaign waged by the enemy through corporate
media, and to inform, educate and organize the people. Like the original
BPP newspaper, The Black Panther, the BRLP established its own
political organ, The Afrikan Intercommunal News Service, and took
it a step further by creating the “Panther Power Radio” station to
“discuss topics relative to armed self-defense against pig police
terrorism and the corrupt prison-industrial complex,” among other
topics.
Like the original BPP, the BRLP have actual Serve the People programs.
When Huey would come across other Black radical (mostly cultural
nationalist) organizations, he would often ask them what kind of
programs they had to serve the needs of the people because he understood
that revolution is not an act, but a process, and that most oppressed
people learn from seeing and doing (actual experience). The BRLP’s
programs consist of our Watch-A-Pig Program, Kourt Watch Program, George
Jackson Freedom After-school Program, Squeeze the Slumlord project, BOSS
Black-on-Black violence prevention and intervention program, gang truce
football games, and Health Organizing Project, to name just a few. These
lumpen tribal elements consciously eschew lumpen-on-lumpen reactionary
violence and become revolutionaries and true servants of the people!
Finally, the BRLP continues the example set by the original BPP by
actively building alliances and coalitions with other
radical/revolutionary organizations. George Jackson stated that “unitary
conduct implies a ‘search’ for those elements in our present situation
which can become the basis for joint action.” (1) In keeping with this
view and the BPP vision of a United Front Against Fascism, in 2012 the
BRLP launched the Intercommunal Solidarity Committee as a mechanism for
building a United Front across ideological, religious, national and
ethnic/racial lines.
While I recognize that the white/euro-Amerikkkan nation in the United
$tates is not an oppressed nation, but in fact represents a “privileged”
class that benefits from the oppression and exploitation of the urban
lumpen class here in the United $tates and Third World people, there
exist a “dynamic sector” of radical, anti-racist, anti-imperialist white
allies willing to commit “class suicide” and aid oppressed and exploited
people in our national liberation struggles. And on that note I say
“Black Power” and “All Power to the People.”
Wiawimawo of MIM(Prisons) responds: For this issue of Under
Lock & Key we received letters attempting to feature the BRLP
(like this one) as well as to critique them. For years, MIM(Prisons) and
the readers of ULK have been watching this group with interest.
We made a few attempts to dialogue directly with them, but the most
concerted effort happened to coincide with the release of
an
attack on us by Turning the Tide, a newsletter that has done
a lot to popularize the work of the BRLP. No direct dialogue occurred.
We thank this BRLP comrade for the article above. The following is a
response not directly to the above, but to the many statements that we
have come across by the BRLP and what we’ve seen of their work on the
streets.
On the surface the BRLP does have a lot similarities to the original
BPP. It models its platform after the BPPs 10 point platform, which was
modeled after Malcolm X’s. The BRLP members don all black as they
confront the police and other state actors and racist forces. They speak
to the poor inner-city youth and came out of lumpen street
organizations. They have worked to build a number of Serve the People
programs. And they have inspired a cadre of young New Afrikans across
the gender line. In order to see the differences between MIM, the BRLP,
and other organizations claiming the Panther legacy today, we need to
look more deeply at the different phases of the Black Panther Party and
how their political line changed.
APSP, AAPRP, NBPP
The BRLP regularly presents itself with the tagline, “the New Generation
Black Panther Party for Self-Defense.” And it is not the first, or the
only organization, to claim this mantel. The African Peoples’ Socialist
Party (APSP) was perhaps the first, having worked with Huey P. Newton
himself at the end of his life. That is why in discussing the Panther
legacy, we need to specify exactly what legacy that is. For MIM, the
period of 1966 to 1969 represented the Maoist phase of the BPP, and
therefore the period we hold up as an example to follow and build on.
Since the time that Huey was alive, the APSP has shifted focus into
building an African Socialist International in the Third World. We see
this as paralleling some of the incipient errors in the BRLP and the
NABPP that we discuss below.
While the APSP goes back to the 1980s, we can trace another contemporary
organization, the All-African People’s Revolutionary Party, to the
1960s.(1) The brain-child of Ghanan President Kwame Nkrumah, the AAPRP
in the United $tates was led by Kwame Toure, formerly Stokely
Carmichael. The AAPRP came to embody much of the cultural and spiritual
tendencies that the Panthers rejected. The BPP built on the Black Power
and draft resistance movements that Carmichael was key in developing
while leading the Student Non-violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC).(2)
Carmichael left SNCC, joining the BPP for a time, and tried to unite the
two groups. But the Panthers later split with SNCC because of SNCC’s
rejection of alliances with white revolutionaries, their promotion of
pan-Afrikanism and Black capitalism. Carmichael’s allies were purged
from the BPP for being a “bunch of cultural nationalist fools” trying
“to undermine the people’s revolution…” “talking about some madness he
called Pan-Africanism.”(3)
In the 1990s, we saw a surge in Black Panther revivalism. MIM played a
role in this, being the first to digitize many articles from The
Black Panther newspaper for the internet and promoting their legacy
in fliers and public events. MIM did not seem to have any awareness of
the Black Riders Liberation Party at this time. There was a short-lived
Ghetto Liberation Party within MIM that attempted to follow in Panther
footsteps. Then the New Black Panther Party began to display Panther
regalia at public rallies in different cities. While initially
optimistic, MIM later printed a critique of the NBPP for its promotion
of Black capitalism and mysticism, via its close connection to the
Nation of Islam.(4) Later the NBPP became a darling of Fox News, helping
them to distort the true legacy of the BPP. Last year the NBPP further
alienated themselves by brutalizing former Black Panther Dhoruba bin
Wahad and others from the Nation of Gods and Earths and the Free the
People Movement. While there is little doubt that the NBPP continues to
recruit well-intentioned New Afrikans who want to build a vanguard for
the nation, it is evident that the leadership was encapsulated by the
state long ago.
Huey’s Intercommunalism
Readers of Under Lock & Key will certainly be familiar with
the New Afrikan Black Panther Party, which was originally an independent
prison chapter of the NBPP. Their promotion of Maoism and New Afrikan
nationalism was refreshing, but they quickly sided with Mao and the
Progressive Labor Party against the BPP and more extreme SNCC lines on
the white oppressor nation of Amerikkka. They went on to reject the
nationalist goals of the BPP, embracing Huey’s theory of
intercommunalism. The NABPP and the BRLP both embrace forms of
“intercommunalism” as leading concepts in their ideological foundations.
And while we disagree with both of them, there are many differences
between them as well. This is not too surprising as the theory was never
very coherent and really marked Newton’s departure from the original
Maoist line of the Party. As a student of David Hilliard, former BPP
Chief of Staff, pointed out around 2005, Hilliard used intercommunalism
as a way to avoid ever mentioning communism in a semester-long class on
the BPP.(5) In the early 1970s, Huey seemed to be using
“intercommunalism” in an attempt to address changing conditions in the
United $tates and confusion caused by the failure of international
forces to combat revisionism in many cases.(6)
Probably the most important implication of Huey’s new line was that he
rejected the idea that nations could liberate themselves under
imperialism. In other words he said Stalin’s promotion of building
socialism in one country was no longer valid, and Trotsky’s theory of
permanent revolution was now true. This was in 1970, when China had just
developed socialism to the highest form we’ve seen to date through the
struggles of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, which also began
50 years ago this year. Huey P. Newton’s visit to China in 1971 was
sandwiched by visits from war criminal Henry Kissinger and U.$.
President Richard Nixon. Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai, who would go on to
foster normalized relations with the U.$. imperialists, stated that
China was ready to negotiate or fight the United $tates in 1971.(7) The
Panther visit was a signal of their development of the second option.
But after 1971, Chinese support for the Panthers dissipated as
negotiations with the imperialists developed.
A bigger problem with Huey’s intercommunalism was how do we address the
Amerikkkan oppressor nation when ey claims there are no more states,
there are no more nations? In eir “speech at Boston College” in 1970 ey
specifically refers to Eldridge Cleaver’s
“On
the Ideology of the Black Panther Party” in order to depart from it.
Newton rejects the analysis of the Black nation as a colony of Amerikkka
that must be liberated. That Cleaver essay from 1969 has great unity
with MIM line and is where we depart with the NABPP and BRLP who uphold
the 1970-1 intercommunalism line of Huey’s.(8)
Black Riders and NABPP Interpret Intercommunalism
To take a closer look at the BRLP itself, let us start with General
T.A.C.O.’s essay “African Intercommunalism I.” Tom Big Warrior of the
NABPP camp has already written a review of it, which makes a number of
critiques that we agree with. He calls out the BRLP for accepting “race”
as a real framework to analyze society, yet the NABPP line also rejects
nation based on Huey’s intercommunalism. At times, the NABPP and BRLP
still use the term nation and colony to refer to New Afrika. This seems
contradictory in both cases. Tom Big Warrior is also very critical of
the BRLP’s claim to update Huey’s theory by adding African cultural and
spiritual elements to it. This is something the Panthers very adamantly
fought against, learning from Fanon who wrote in Wretched of the
Earth, one of the Panthers’ favorite books: “The desire to attach
oneself to tradition or bring abandoned traditions to life again does
not only mean going against the current of history but also opposing
one’s own people”.(9) This revision of intercommunalism is one sign of
the BRLPs conservatism relative to the original BPP who worked to create
the new man/womyn, new revolutionary culture and ultimately a new
society in the spirit of Mao and Che.
The NABPP is really the more consistent proponent of “revolutionary
intercommunalism.” In their analysis a worldwide revolution must occur
to overthrow U.$. imperialism. This differs from the MIM view in that we
see the periphery peeling off from imperialism little-by-little,
weakening the imperialist countries, until the oppressed are strong
enough to impose some kind of international dictatorship of the
proletariat of the oppressed nations over the oppressor nations. The
NABPP says we “must cast off nationalism and embrace a globalized
revolutionary proletarian world view.”(10) They propose “building a
global United Panther Movement.” These are not really new ideas,
reflecting a new reality as they present it. These are the ideas of
Trotsky, and at times of most of the Bolsheviks leading up to the
Russian revolution.
Even stranger is the BRLP suggestion that, “once we overthrow the
Amerikkkan ruling class, there will be a critical need to still liberate
Africa.”(11) The idea that the imperialists would somehow be overthrown
before the neo-colonial puppets of the Third World is completely
backwards. Like the APSP, the NABPP and the BRLP seem to echo this idea
of a New Afrikan vanguard of the African or World revolution.
MIM(Prisons) disagrees with all these parties in that we see New Afrika
as being closer to Amerika in its relation to the Third World, despite
its position as a semi-colony within the United $tates.(12)
The NABPP claims that “Huey was right! Not a single national liberation
struggle produced a free and independent state.”(13) And they use this
“fact” to justify support for “Revolutionary Intercommunalism.” Yet this
new theory has not proven effective in any real world revolutions,
whereas the national liberation struggle in China succeeded in building
the most advanced socialist system known to history. Even the Panthers
saw steep declines in their own success after the shift towards
intercommunalism. So where is the practice to back up this theory?
We also warn our readers that both the NABPP and BRLP make some
outlandishly false statistical claims in order to back up their
positions. For example, the NABPP tries to validate Huey’s predictions
by stating, “rapid advances in technology and automation over the past
several decades have caused the ranks of the unemployed to grow
exponentially.”(13) It is not clear if they are speaking globally or
within the United $tates. But neither have consistent upward trends in
unemployment, and certainly not exponential trends! Meanwhile, in an
essay on the crisis of generational divides and tribal warfare in New
Afrika the BRLP claims that the latter “has caused more deaths in just
Los Angeles than all the casualties in the Yankee imperialist Vietnam
war combined!!!”(14) There were somewhere between 1 million and 3
million deaths in the U.$. war against Vietnamese self-determination.
[EDIT: Nick Turse cites Vietnam official statistics closer to 4
million] Los Angeles sees hundreds of deaths from gang shootings in a
year. We must see things as they are, and not distort facts to fit our
propaganda purposes if we hope to be effective in changing the world.
Black Riders
We will conclude with our assessment of the BRLP based on what we have
read and seen from them. While we dissect our disagreements with some of
their higher level analysis above, many of their articles and statements
are quite agreeable, echoing our own analysis. And we are inspired by
their activity focusing on serving and organizing the New Afrikan lumpen
on the streets. In a time when New Afrikan youth are mobilizing against
police brutality in large numbers again, the BRLP is a more radical
force at the forefront of that struggle. Again, much of this work echoes
that of the original BPP, but some of the bigger picture analysis is
missing.
In our interactions with BRLP members we’ve seen them promote anarchism
and the 99% line, saying that most white Amerikkkans are exploited by
capitalism. BRLP, in line with cultural nationalism, stresses the
importance of “race,” disagreeing with Newton who, even in 1972, was
correctly criticizing in the face of rampant neo-colonialism: “If we
define the prime character of the oppression of blacks as racial, then
the situation of economic exploitation of human beings by human being
can be continued if performed by blacks against blacks or blacks against
whites.”(15) Newton says we must unite the oppressed “in eliminating
exploitation and oppression” not fight “racism” as the BRLP and their
comrades in People Against Racist Terror focus on.
This leads us to a difference with the BRLP in the realm of strategy. It
is true that the original BPP got into the limelight with armed
confrontations with the pigs. More importantly, it was serving the
people in doing so. So it is hard to say that the BPP was wrong to do
this. While Huey concluded that it got ahead of the people and alienated
itself from the people, the BRLP seems to disagree by taking on an even
more aggressive front. This has seemingly succeeded in attracting the
ultra-left, some of whom are dedicated warriors, but has already
alienated potential allies. While BRLP’s analysis of the BPPs failure to
separate the underground from the aboveground is valuable, it seems to
imply a need for an underground insurgency at this time. In contrast,
MIM line agrees with Mao that the stage of struggle in the imperialist
countries is one of long legal battles until the imperialists become so
overextended by armed struggles in the periphery that the state begins
to weaken. It is harder to condemn Huey Newton for seeing that as the
situation in the early years of the Panthers, but it is clearly not the
situation today. In that context, engaging in street confrontations with
racists seems to offer more risk than reward in terms of changing the
system.
While the BRLP doesn’t really tackle how these strategic issues may have
affected the success and/or demise of the BPP, it also does not make any
case for how a lack of cultural and spiritual nationalism were a
shortcoming that set back the Panthers. BRLP also spends an inordinate
amount of their limited number of articles building a cult of
persynality around General T.A.C.O. So despite its claims of learning
from the past, we see its analysis of the BPP legacy lacking in both its
critiques and emulations of BPP practices.
While physical training is good, and hand-to-hand combat is a
potentially useful skill for anyone who might get in difficult
situations, there should be no illusions about such things being
strategic questions for the success of revolutionary organizations in
the United $tates today. When your people can all clean their rifle
blind-folded but they don’t even know how to encrypt their email, you’ve
already lost the battle before it’s started.
Finally, the BRLP has tackled the youth vs. adult contradiction head on.
Its analysis of how that plays out in oppressed nations today parallels
our own. And among the O.G. Panthers themselves they have been very
critical as well, and with good cause. It is clear that we will need a
new generation Black Panthers that is formed of and led by the New
Afrikan youth of today. But Huey was known to quote Mao that with the
correct political line will come support and weapons, and as conditions
remain much less revolutionary than the late 1960s, consolidation of
cadre around correct and clear political lines is important preparatory
work for building a new vanguard party in the future.
Yes, I’m a hypocrite. I castigate the anarchists for busting out
Starbucks windows or torching the Governor’s mansion without achieving
any political gains or advantage; yet here I am doing 4 years for
assaulting a pig, trying to bring a little Ferguson to Austin.
Subjective? How ’bout plain idiocy. I was not disciplined and had been
losing my self-discipline for years. My present imprisonment caused my
then 13-year-old granddaughter to ask how her grandpa could possibly be
locked away in prison. I explained to her the contradictions between
visceral and cerebral actions. In effect, I had to admit to my adoring
granddaughter that grandpa was an ass at the time of my arrest.
MIM(Prisons) responds: We thank this comrade for eir
self-criticism and willingness to share this mistake for others to learn
from. We all face a constant struggle to navigate between right and left
errors. This is a particularly tough challenge in the First World where
we cannot ground ourselves in the proletarian majority to stay
orientated. The above is an example of a left error; more specifically a
left subjectivist error. Some ultra-leftism is based on a belief that
armed struggle now is the best way to spark the revolution. While this
comrade did not believe that, still ey gave in to subjective desires for
action. We’d say eir action was actually worse than the real anarchists
who have a line closer to the former.
Left errors are more dangerous in terms of getting put in prison or
hurt. Then you can live the rest of your life in prison or on disability
with your street cred for what you did that one time. Right errors are a
less respectable way of giving in, in the eyes of most. But both are a
form of giving up, particularly when driven by subjectivism.
Without a proletariat base we must seek out a source of grounding to
avoid these tendencies. Reading and study is one great way to do this.
Having comrades who you work with who can keep you in check is another
way. This is one reason one-persyn cells are not ideal. If you do find
yourself isolated in your location, try to stay in touch with an
organization you trust through regular communications. It is also
possible to find pockets of society where there is a revolutionary, or
at least progressive current that can keep you motivated. Finally,
music, culture, meditation and other leisure time activities can help
you stay focused and orientated.
I have on my cell wall, “Afghan Girl,” Steve McCurry’s photograph that
graced the cover of a 1985 National Geographic. I’m sure MIM is familiar
with “Afghan Girl.” It’s one of my favorite selections of photo
journalism/art.
2010, NG again dispatched McCurry to Afghanistan in search of “Afghan
Girl” in commemoration of the 25th anniversary of the famous photo.
McCurry found “Afghan Girl,” just as before - still living in the dirt.
I would wager McCurry has made tens of thousands, nay, hundreds of
thousands of dollars in proceeds from “Afghan Girl.” Obviously,
McCurry’s subject didn’t receive squat.
My question to MIM is: Should “Afghan Girl” be compensated for McCurry’s
photo commensurate to revenue generated, even though said revenue is
derived form superprofits? After all, “Afghan Girl” was McCurry’s model.
Extrapolating form the above, if prisoners are thrown nickels an dimes
by the prisoncrats, are prisoners then feeding at the imperialist
trough? I, myself, don’t give 2 hoots if Texas prisoners are paid or
not. That would just bequeath the man more authoritative leverage to be
used against us. I don’t give a fuck ’bout commissary, unless you’re
talking about boycotting or looting it. And the Texas so-called
“good-time” scheme is a farcical sham.
MIM(Prisons) responds: There is some value, in a world where the
government and its structures are actually serving the interests of the
majority of the world’s people, to superstructure systems of media and
arts that also serve the people. But in the case of a photo exposing
conditions of poverty and suffering, these should be used to identify
problems and inspire action to change, not to generate wealth for the
photographer.
The imperialists have come up with a myriad of ways to make money off
the backs of Third World people. It is true that revenue for a photo is
just a shifting around of superprofits; obviously there is no actual
value or profit created from the taking of a photograph, or from being
photographed. But instead this shows how the privileged in the First
World share the wealth stolen from the Third World, to First World
workers who are mostly engaged in unproductive labor. Rather than ask
whether the Afghan girl in the photo should be compensated for the
photo, instead we say that the entire situation is wrong and
demonstrates how imperialism is more interested in profit than the
welfare of human beings. This is just one small example further
demonstrating that capitalism is a dead end system and must be replaced
with a system that serves the interests of the majority, not the profit
of the minority.