Under Lock & Key

In the last year there’s been some struggle over MIM(Prisons)’s six main points. This is a good thing, as it indicates emerging Maoist cells trying to reconcile what does and should unite us. The focus of issue 54 of Under Lock & Key is tactics. Tactics are not what unite us. Tactics is the realm where we need many cells trying many different things. Tactics are guided by line and strategy, but are much more flexible over shorter time periods and therefore require creativity that is in touch with the masses.

Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, or Maoism for short, is MIM(Prisons)’s political line. Maoism does not tell us whether putting money into one big advertisement or thousands of little fliers will have the greater effect. Maoism also doesn’t tell us whether a hunger strike will be more effective than a legal battle. These are tactical questions.

Dividing Lines or Dividing Over Tactics

In the last year, a cell that we considered part of the broader Maoist Internationalist Movement (MIM) split with MIM(Prisons) over what we saw as a tactical question. Maoists should never split over tactical questions; this is the theoretical importance of distinguishing between line, strategy and tactics.

We pushed this cell to present their split in terms of ideological line in relation to our six main points. The response was that they uphold the six main points but believe there are other issues to split over, such as promoting white supremacy, which they accused MIM(Prisons) of doing. They came to this conclusion after MIM(Prisons) did not print a statement criticizing the actions of prison activists that we have no affiliation with. This cell had a history of working closely with MIM(Prisons) over many years. And despite all the work we have done in that time (work that they admit challenged white supremacy) they were willing to split with us over this one action (or lack of action).

We see this as an error in how one should assess other cells. A cell, just as an individual, should be assessed on the whole. If a cell has acted according to one line for years, but did one thing that you see as violating that line, you probably should not split with that cell. That would be an ultra-left error, because you are expecting others to be perfect. Once it has been established by a pattern of actions that a cell has shifted its line and violated cardinal principles, then it would be correct to stop working with and possibly publicly criticize that cell.

In this particular case, MIM(Prisons) was condemned, not for participating in an event perceived to be white supremacist in nature, but for not condemning it. In contrast, MIM(Prisons) would argue that in most cases even if we had participated in this one event, that would still not be sufficient reason to split. You might publicly condemn the event yourself, but this should not rise to the level of creating splits in the Maoist Internationalist Movement. Willingness to split over non-cardinal issues is a threat to our ability to consolidate our forces in this country where individualism and splitism prevail. (To clarify, division of labor into collaborating cells is not the same as a split.)

If a cell does promote a campaign that caters to white nationalism, then one should criticize that based on our 4th point on the First World labor aristocracy being a force for imperialism, and as a violation of the Maoist line that oppressed nations have a right to self-determination. As anti-imperialists, supporting the labor aristocracy and undermining oppressed-nation self-determination is a no no. And a consistent practice of doing this indicates an underlying incorrect line that is a cause for splitting.

Principles of Line or Strategy?

Another MIM cell recently questioned why MIM(Prisons) put forth 6 points, adding on to the 3 cardinal principles that have historically defined the MIM.(see p. 2 of ULK) While we do present our 6 points in place of the 3 cardinals, it was not necessarily to say that the 3 cardinals were insufficient to define who is a communist. However, we must admit that we created confusion there.

The origin of our 6 main points is twofold. Our first goal with the six main points was to distinguish ourselves in the eyes of our readers. We were frustrated with the countless letters from people telling us to work with other groups, stop criticizing other groups and just unite around our common fight for justice. We wanted to succinctly differentiate ourselves from the countless organizations out there. Point 1 separates us from the Liberals, and in point 2 we split from the anarchists. Neither of those points were necessary in MIM’s 3 cardinals, because all those claiming to be communists already agree on those two points. Point 3 separated us from the Trotskyists and neo-Trostkyists whose idealism leads them to unite with the petty-bourgeoisie in the First World while criticizing the bourgeois forces in the Third World even when they are fighting against imperialism. Points 4-6 are essentially the MIM cardinals.

While the 3 cardinals, as MIM came to refer to them, are nice and succinct dividing line points, they originally appeared in a greater context of a piece entitled “Who is a communist?” in the second edition of What is MIM?, which discusses concepts like “the abolition of power of people over people,” “a communist party… is necessary,” “democratic centralism,” and “general unity with all other groups and outbreaks against imperialism.”

The second contextual thing to understand about our 6 points is that they were developed in the early years of our organization, when those in the MIM camp were figuring out how to relate to each other as separate cells/organizations. It was also a period of fierce struggle against those promoting a third way in the post-9/11 Middle East, while framing the struggles there as “McWorld vs. Jihad.” Therefore, our point 3 became, in the eyes of many organizations at that time, a dividing line question. The original MIM comrades, in fact, pushed this line hard to expose revisionists allying with the U.$. state department. While it is often tied up with the labor aristocracy question, it stands alone as its own point.

Mao’s practice on building the united front of classes in oppressed countries, and eir theoretical writings on this topic contributed to our line on the subject and the development of point 3. We can also take lessons from the rectification movement of the Communist Party of the Philippines to find universal line lessons on united front building. However, in practice, who to form united fronts with is really a strategic question, as the answer may change as the strategic stage of struggle changes.

Mao’s contribution on united front work was based on the assessment of the principal contradiction being between the oppressed nations and imperialism. Some seventy years later, we can say this is still the situation. But someday it will change. That is what makes our point 3 a strategic question and not a universal line question. From the early days of MIM, differences on the assessment of the principal contradiction have been a primary point of criticism MIM made of revisionist parties. That said, MIM never said the principal contradiction or united front was a cardinal principle.

In our point 2, we point out the need for a Joint Dictatorship of the Proletariat of the Oppressed Nations (JDPON) in order to implement socialism in the imperialist countries. This is MIM Thought, a logical application of MIM’s line on the labor aristocracy to the universal communist principle of the need for a dictatorship of the proletariat. It is also a strategy question, that does not necessarily have universal application.

Who Defines the Cardinals?

“The materialist approach to cardinal principles stresses an examination of actual history, not just our own vivid imaginations of how the world SHOULD BE. We materialists do not take splitting the proletariat and its vanguard party lightly. We form only as many cardinal principles as are necessary to unmask the enemy’s attempts to infiltrate us or divert us to a less efficient road to communism.” - MC5(1)

The cell structure complicates things further. For with a centralized organization MIM could say that if you agree on these three points and the need for a party then you should join ours. Then you are obligated to accept our other lines until you convince the party to change them. With many small cells there is not democratic centralism on line in this way, and we could see many disagreements on many non-cardinal issues. This could lead to confusion and division in the movement. Therefore we caution all MIM cells to carefully think out their positions before disagreeing with historical MIM line and the lines of other contemporary cells.

At the same time, we must not hold dogmatically to MIM Thought frozen in time of 2006 or earlier. The three cardinals themselves evolved over the years of the original MIM. While MIM formed in 1983, they did not get serious about the third cardinal until 1987.(2) In the MIM Notes archive, which is incomplete for these early years, it is issue 42 from June 1990 when we first see the 3 cardinals presented as such. However, the paper version of issue 42 does not feature the 3 cardinals, so this seems to have been added to the web version after the fact. MIM Notes Issue 50 (March 1991) does have the 3 cardinals listed in the paper version. In 1999, MIM expanded the 3rd cardinal to include reference to Marx, Engels and Lenin, describe the oppressor nation labor aristocracy as a petty bourgeois class and specifically list which countries this line applies to.(3)

In practice, MIM used the 3 cardinal principles to determine fraternal status.(4) This came up most strongly when it decided that the third cardinal applied internationally and not just to First World parties, thus cutting its direct promotion of some who were practicing People’s War in the Third World. This began with the “Resolution on defending cardinal principles in international context,” 2002, but it was sometime after 2002 when MIM actually stopped any promotion of those parties.

Building MIM Today

MIM(Prisons) was announced as a MIM cell on 8 October 2007. To this day we often refer to “Maoism Around Us,” published in May 2009, when discussing these issues. This was one of what could be considered the founding documents of MIM(Prisons). While our ideology was already represented in the expansive work of MIM, in that article we addressed the situation we found ourselves in as the original centralized organization of MIM had ceased to exist. In it we pointed out that the MIM lives on, by the same definition as it always has. We continued to print MIM’s 3 cardinal principles in most issues of Under Lock & Key.

It was after our first official congress in July of 2010 that MIM(Prisons) put out our six main points. Since then we have referred to them as our “cardinal points” once or twice, and printed them in every issue of ULK with a similar tagline as we once printed MIM’s three cardinals: “MIM(Prisons) distinguishes ourselves from other groups on the six points below.”

As we’ve said before, we need more Maoist Internationalist cells. Topical cells that focus on gender, ecology and the environment, and anti-militarism are all good candidates. And there is an endless need for locality-based cells that focus on local recruitment and building around popular movements in the region that align with the interests of the Third World proletariat. But us saying this does not make them appear out of thin air. As we gain small victories in recruiting comrades outside prisons, we wonder if the MIM needs institutions that can allow those who agree on the 3 cardinals to join up in a meaningful way. A way that provides coordination without sacrificing security, independent initiative and other benefits of the cell structure. Six months ago we set up the subreddit /r/mao_internationalist “to help individuals and groups allied with the Maoist Internationalist Movement support each others’ work.” Maybe it is time to refocus on the 3 cardinals and push for a regroupment of MIM.

There are United Struggle from Within (USW) cells that might as well be considered MIM cells due to their advanced political practice. And there are prison-based cells that are in the MIM camp that are not USW, which are usually nation-based. We support the nation-based organizing strategy as a reason to form a new organization separate from USW. There is probably no tactical advantage to identifying prison-based cells as MIM cells, because of the repression in the prison environment, although there is obvious theoretical advantage in summarizing a group’s line and practice.

Being in prison limits one’s ability to coordinate with other cells without relying on MIM(Prison). For our own organization, MIM(Prisons) does not accept prisoners as members because it is not possible to have democratic centralism when all our mail is read by state employees. When coordinating between cells, we need to make similar considerations.

In most contexts that we are aware of, MIM(Prisons) is seen as the foremost cell representing the MIM today. While we are honored by that recognition, it is also a sign of how far we have to go. Discussion of party formation is no more relevant today than it was ten years ago when our organization just formed. If we cannot get more than a handful of cells putting in work at the level that MIM(Prisons) does, how can we build a Maoist Party? And what good would such a party do? There is no question of seizing power in the United $tates today, where MIM(Prisons) is based. But there is much work to do to prepare for that inevitability as the imperialists overextend themselves militarily and the Third World continues to strike blows against them.

I was sitting on tier speaking with a brotha on an intellectual note on topics in your ULK 52 issue. The thing is neither of us ever seen your publication (any of them). After we were done another brotha handed me issue No. 52 on his way to see the Sergeant over some writeups he got when they hit his room. He told me “you’ll like this!”

Now before we explore my reaction to your publication you have to know the ground on which I stand and the position I’m coming from. I’m a sex offender. Believe it or not, not by choice, but in the state of Nevada I knew that signing a deal would be the only way to see light again. Trial would be death.

I read your issue from front to back. The whole time I was reading it I wanted to write to you and tell you how I was waiting for something like this to approach me. Then, I got to the last page and read the upcoming themes. In No. 55 I read “Would unity with pariahs such as snitches or child molesters ever be appropriate?” Reading that prompted me to switch my motive to speak on this first hand. But before I can do that you need to know a little about me.

I was raised very well with a loving family. My academics always were “en punto.” National Honor Society – all that stuff. I spent 9 years in the military. Leaving my family several times so spoiled brats could remain safely at home with theirs. I have an Associates Degree, I’m semi-fluent in Spanish, I’m halfway through obtaining a paralegal certificate from Blackstone, I’m a writer, and I’m Black.

I will not defend child molesters or snitches but I want to shed some light on sex offenders in general – since I am one. I have five kids so I know the need to protect my babies. Then I found myself fighting for my life on the very subject that I said I would kill someone over for messing with my babies.

I had and have a different outlook now by my circumstances and by removing my bias. After it was evident I was coming to prison I decided to help other sex offenders (SOs) fight their cases. I obtained a client, a pisa, who couldn’t speak English well. I fine-tooth-combed his discovery. There was no evidence but much hearsay. Despite my help and a paid lawyer he received a kidnapping and sexual assault charge with a teen.

Sounds like a typical innocence story right? Well, I have more detail that I can’t tell you but I believe he’s innocent. There are more people in here with similar innocence claims all over the world but I wanted to get to a point in response to your issue No. 55 question.

Prison has a caste system and SOs find their way to the bottom. We are the lowest class in society and outside of society. I don’t like calling myself a sex offender. In fact, I’m not, but I’m labeled as one because my charge says that I am. My circumstances of my charge won’t allow me to admit to being one. But it doesn’t matter what I think or say. I’ve noticed, in my time around other SOs that they (most of them) made a mistake or a bad choice. I’m not talking about rapists, but still, I’ve met some very good people.

I’ve lived a very good life. I always been hard working, trustworthy, reliable, smart and loving. I’ve learned a lot in the military especially from visiting foreign countries. Cambodia and Iraq taught me a lot. Before now I never been in trouble with the law. When I didn’t have I still gave. And I still do. I run store in my unit but it’s not for me. The profit takes care of who I choose, who I believe is the less fortunate. If somehow I can make one person see that sex offenders are human, I made a difference. I would like to be a force to help unite all. The sex offender label shouldn’t disqualify people in a movement bigger than us because if it does – would that really be socialism?

MIM(Prisons) responds: “Sex offenders” in general are seen as pariahs who can’t be touched, and certainly can’t be part of a progressive movement. But as this comrade points out, people are labeled as sex offenders by our enemies, and we have no reason to take their word for it. How many people behind bars are unjustly sentenced or even innocent? Why do prisoners know this is true for people convicted of other crimes, but condemn all convicted sex offenders on the word of the criminal injustice system?

Our society encourages rape. Movies, music, advertising, porn, it’s all pushing coercion and sex. Rape is coerced sex, and in a patriarchal society it’s impossible to set up a relationship where both people are totally equal. There are differences in income, social status, beauty, educational achievement, etc. etc. All these things have become part of what people find attractive and we are indoctrinated to believe these inequalities are sexy.

We don’t let people off the hook for knowingly committing violence against other people. But we also know that people are a product of their culture and we need to push for the re-education of people if we hope to build a society where all people truly are equal. Because of this, we must also judge people based on what they do, and not a label put on them by the criminal injustice system. We agree with this writer that people make mistakes, and that they can change.

I start this letter sending out all my respects to all involved in educating and enlightening those persons such as myself.

These past couple of weeks have been a little hectic. Here at Chuckawalla Valley State Prison, we have had difficulties with the administration censoring our mail.

I am most grateful for the letter of support your people wrote to Warden Seibel. It gave me support as to what direction to push my 22 form [Inmate/Parolee Request for Interview, Item, or Service].

With that I am proud to say that they called me back within 24 hours, saying I “will no longer have any problems receiving [my] mail” :)

Finally, yesterday my name was called to pick up Sept/Oct. 2016, No. 52 issue. Honestly I was shocked, empowered to know the feeling of winning these people is such a childish move on their behalf. I sat in the dayroom reading the publication with honor and pride.

MIM(Prisons) adds: This victory came through comrades coming together and filing appeals and paperwork on the inside and the outside. This comrade should be proud for standing up for eir First Amendment rights and following through on the bureaucratic process that is often there to wear you down.

However, this is not the first time Warden Siebel has assured us that the censorship issue has been addressed. So we must remain always vigilant. Our rights only exist to the extent that we struggle for them. And Amerikans will continue to oppress others as long as imperialism remains in place.

First, before we erect or construct anything we must have a strong foundation, a base – so to speak. Otherwise the whole structure will eventually collapse. That said, we must focus most of our energy and efforts on building a base inside prison, then work our way outwards. Once we are well-rooted, it will be easy to branch out by sending our ideology to the streets with serious minded brothas/sistas who will push the movement out there. However, that is not to say that we shouldn’t be trying to build out there right now.

Thus, we must advocate for the development of a movement rooted in the revolutionary tradition that looks out for the interests of all oppressed people as a whole, opposes fratricidal violence (black-on-black, brown-on-brown) and work to develop an alliance with other social movements outside prison.

Secondly, we must understand that even small movements, because they include people with different ideas, reveal political debates over next steps, practical objectives, potential allies, and movement tactics. The idea and politics that guide a specific movement have a profound effect on its ultimate direction as well as on the activists involved. But, the guiding politics of social movement don’t simply appear out of thin air. Rank-and-file BPP members themselves invented the armed self-defense tactics just as rank-and-file civil rights leaders developed the civil disobedience and non-violent protest strategy, and these members had to win others to these new tactics through a process of political debate and experience. They were leading with their ideas and testing them in practice.

Political leadership is just this: individuals, with the experience of struggle, can advance ideas and tactics that will strengthen the movement and develop to help prepare it for the next stages in struggle – whether economic, political, or ideological.

Huey P. Newton and others recognized the importance of uniting oppressed people into a political party that could act as a unit, providing leadership and an important counter-weight to the overbearing power of the capitalist state.

I’m going to finish with a quote from one of the leaders of the Black Power movement, who said “when a people arises, when it develops awareness, when it is convinced of the righteousness of its actions, there is nothing that can stop it. The people sweep aside all obstacles placed in their path like a whirlwind cleaning out all the dirt in a country.”

Now, we have a lot of work to do before we can go around making claims like that. But this idea that we need to be building inside right now is, I think, the only perspective that fits when you understand that we’re looking at a war against the system that is being launched from within, and when you understand the scale of resistance that is necessary.

People are receptive to the “idea” of resisting, but they’re doing so in a context in which their revolutionary spirit is very weak and needs to be ignited. But, this is the task of our generation, and I think these kinds of ideas we are building on now are all about the process of trying to rebuild that Black revolutionary fighting anti-capitalist regime.

MIM(Prisons) adds: “Unity from the inside out” is a slogan that United Struggle from Within has used in promoting the development of unity among and between lumpen organizations (LOs) in prison. This slogan echoes the strategy promoted above of building a strong prison movement to affect the rest of society. Sloganeering is one of the tactical tasks necessary to build an effective anti-imperialist movement. Good slogans are based in mass line. This means taking correct ideas from the masses and reinforcing them through propaganda. Finding effective slogans and language that connects the mass consciousness to the revolutionary struggle should be a focus of USW. This is part of what it means to provide leadership as the comrade describes above.

Currently on a day to day we are faced with dealing with situations that are not part of our sentence. For me I have to decide what approach or tactics I can use dealing with correctional staff whose behavior has escalated from being rude to disrespectful and retaliative. Here, in Washington, Correctional Officers (COs) try to gain popularity amongst their peers by doing disrespectful things and abusing their authority in order to impress each other. They do things like slam your cuff door, kick your door while you sleep, and put your handcuffs on too tight. I’ve seen officers tampering with an offender’s food. This causes me anxiety. I suffer from panic attacks and my mental stability can’t handle the paranoia.

It’s like figuring out how to deal with a high school bully. I’ve completed courses in Non-Violent Communication (NVC) and also dispute resolutions. I’ve taken classes on human relations and was a very popular person out in the community where I am from. The CO is a new kind of bully. Similar to a bad boss you can choose to submit to their abusive ways, you know, favoritism, laziness, lying to offenders, slacking off, pretending as if their job is hard and stressful. You can become more passive and avoid conflict and simply stay out the way. Take the disrespect with a smile, do your time, and go home. My father told me to do this, to succumb to their oppression, do your time, and come home.

Because I’ve been sentenced to 126 months to life they have extended my sentence 3 times due to infractions and some made up reason concerning my mental health. I am a convicted sex offender guilty of rape in the 2nd degree domestic violence. A crime I committed against the mother of my child. Having said that, I understand the ideology that a sex offender is a pathetic human being deserving of whatever treatment he or she has coming. However, with crime, and I mean any crime now, there are people who will suffer indirectly. Families and loved ones who care get victimized when an offender is in prison and receives unfair, cruel and unusual punishment, abuse and neglect and these are people living the right way.

For a criminal to just avoid conflict, do his time and get out, is far more damaging because you left that offender in a cycle of behavior that leads to more crime and often someone’s death. So no I don’t choose to just do my time and go home. I continue to make a difference, that’s how I do my time. If god wants me to be in here for 20 more years so be it. I am helping the men in here internalize change. I may have stopped a family member or loved one from harm by providing new perspectives and ideas that change minds and unlock potential.

So these five tactics I’ve come up with have nothing to do with avoiding. Just providing solutions.

• Before deciding to deal with any issue check your intentions. Deciding whether the issue is detrimental or not and it has nothing to do with your ego.
• Learn the 7 habits of highly effective people. Use them, practice them with your comrades. Seek first to understand all angles, give little of your reasoning but get all of theirs. That way you can punch holes in their lies and stories.
• Push paperwork, write grievances and kites, use them as documentation. Because you never know when it may go to a lawsuit. Of course, that is not the goal, but fairness and equal protection treatment is.
• Transfer power, officers tend to make a lot of mistakes but be considerate of their intentions. A lot of times it’s because they haven’t been told something or simply feel discomfort. You can ease the tension by helping them see the bigger perspective simply by asking questions. So that way they can come to their own conclusions.
• Be reasonable, listen to reason and compromise. In the end it is all about respect. You will have officers who are flat out disrespectful. A lot of them feel they have to operate this way in order to get complacence and respect. So you can’t take it personal but you should handle all your issues at the lowest form always.

MIM(Prisons) responds: We want to applaud this comrade’s commitment to do more than just do eir time, instead trying to transform the consciousness of others while locked behind bars. There are a few things in here we want to comment on. First, many will criticize us for even printing something written by a sex offender, but we want to push people to consider the ideas rather than judging them based on the background of the people who put out the ideas. 2+2=4 no matter who says it. But even more importantly, someone who previously advocated that 2+2=5 can change and learn why eir previous answer was wrong. We believe the same is true of all people who commit acts against the people with sufficient self-criticism and re-education.

As far as the tactics proposed by this comrade, we agree with the points that promote checking your ego, and filing grievances and maintaining documentation. However, we have some disagreements with this writer’s proposals about how to deal with people. First, when dealing with our comrades we should not tell people to “give little of your reasoning but get all of theirs.” If this comrade is suggesting we do this with the enemy then that’s fine, but with our comrades we should be honest and straightforward about our reasoning as we seek to build unity and respect.

On the other hand we think this writer gives too much credit to officers suggesting that they can be won over through respect and consideration. While it’s true that we don’t need to start with aggressiveness and should seek to diffuse situations that might work against us, we should not fool ourselves into believing that officers will come around to our side if we just treat them nicely. The prison system is set up to put officers in a position where abuse of prisoners is encouraged. It’s not just personalities of individuals or lack of perspective that cause the problems, it’s the system itself. We need to be clear on this so that we can stay focused on the system as the enemy.

In an article titled “Revolutionary Nationalism and the Afro-American Student,” published in January 1965, Max Stanford argued that Black students of the “warbaby” generation embodied several contradictions at once – contradictions that could lead them to embrace capitalism and white values, check out altogether, or join the revolutionary movement. What I like about this idea from Max Stanford is many of us Black lumpens scream and protest about oppression and unjustice. But as soon as we’re pacified with promises of more jobs and wage growth we tend to get amnesia on how capitalism is creating the oppression and injustices.

Sometimes I question organizations that scream that we need to be free and equal but still want to hold on to petit-bourgeois ideas. I can agree with Max Stanford about the warbaby generation that wants oppression to end but will embrace capitalism as if that system will truly liberate them from oppression. I see this happening today; what we should be protesting about is bringing in a new economic system which can give us control of the means of production. Rather than riot and protest and beg these imperialists for more oppression and injustice in order to satisfy our material desires.

Another point I want to express is the embracing of white values. When we hear the term white values what is Max Stanford getting at? Well he must mean how Blacks will adopt lifestyles and ideology that most capitalist whites have. Now I assume Max Stanford was envisioning a future in which New Afrikans would sell out the revolution for material wealth in supporting a system which creates class divisions in Amerikkka and abroad. A lot of revolutionaries of the past used self-censorship in order to support capitalism and gave up on the struggle for the fear of being isolated targets of the imperialist masters. We have even gone so far as denying self-determination. So I agree with Max Stanford’s statement that Black revolutionaries would embrace white values.

MIM(Prisons) responds: This writer raises a very relevant point about the potential for oppressed nation people to be pacified with material wealth. We have seen a movement towards integration and buying off oppressed nations within U.$. borders, as a part of a dual-pronged strategy from the government since the revolutionary movements of the 60s and 70s: dramatic incarceration rates combined with significant movement towards integration. We still see sufficient national oppression that we continue to have distinct nations within U.$. borders, but as with other nations in the past, Amerika could decide to fully integrate its oppressed nations to focus its energy on the exploitation of the Third World. Already superprofits are being shared with the Chican@ and New Afrikan nations so that even while facing national oppression they are enjoying an economic benefit from their Amerikan citizenship. And this promise of material benefit does lead revolutionaries to give up the struggle, as this author points out.

So we have to ask, what should revolutionaries do with these material conditions? This issue of ULK is about movement tactics, and it is an analysis of our conditions that should lead us to determine what are appropriate tactics and strategy for our organizing work. At this point in time we still believe that the principal contradiction within U.$. borders is between the oppressor nation and oppressed nations. It’s even possible we will see this contradiction heighten as the white supremacists gain a stronger foothold in open roles in the government. So for now it is our job to educate and organize the revolutionaries, with a focus on the oppressed nations. But we are not fighting for the economic advancement of oppressed nation workers, who are already benefiting from imperialism. Our message must be clear: we are internationalists, fighting to end all national oppression, not just gain a bigger piece of the pie for internal oppressed nations while the pie is baked with the labor of exploited Third World workers.

I have recently watched a well-planned election and campaign by Donald Trump, soon to be president of the United Snakes of Amerika. But I have to give him credit where credit is due. First, the Democrats for years have used the minority vote to get elected, by making promises of making eir life more better under a democratic capitalistic society.

I do want to question protest. They only focus on revolutionary nationalist struggles aligning their struggle with the left wing national bourgeoisie and with women and men of the left wing nations of the oppressed in Amerika. But we should also remember that not all struggles lead to socialism. The recent protests have cells that are revolutionary nationalism, where the people want the power. We need to study and use strategic methods to overthrow imperialism period. Why protest about issues that are not in line with changing our current economic system?

Now back to my opening on why I give Trump credit. Not to say I support his ideology or policies. I am considering how he managed to get support from the patriarchal labor aristocracy, and the First World lumpens. And some lumpens in the poor rural districts. This explains why Mao asked “who are our enemies, who are our friends?” The white proletariat showed up and it lets us know that they are the majority. And will support a system of imperialism. And the oppression of the Third World peasants. Just as long as the bourgeoisie be fed the illusions that jobs will come back to Amerikkka!

MIM(Prisons) responds: Overall this comrade has a good analysis of the election of Trump and the class that is behind this campaign. However, we want to point out that they are not a white proletariat but rather a white petty bourgeoisie. This distinction is important because the Amerikan workers are not exploited, and this is why they support imperialism: they are benefiting economically from imperialism! It doesn’t really matter if a few jobs come back to the United $tates or not. As was proven with the failed attempts to get citizens to work the fields picking crops, there are some jobs that Amerikans really don’t want. The petty bourgeois class thinks it is owed cushy jobs at high wages, but has no problem with people in the Third World doing grueling work for pennies. The only jobs the Amerikan workers want back are high paying jobs that don’t require much work.

For anyone who believes the myth that white workers in the United $tates are on the decline and getting poorer, we have much in-depth documentation about the level of wealth enjoyed by the vast majority of Amerikan citizens and their well-above-exploitation level wages. This is a question of science, that is all the more important now that it has gained attention not only among false revolutionaries seeking to rally the so-called Amerikan proletariat but also among right-wing politicians gaining center stage in Amerikan politics. As this writer points out, we must be clear about who are our enemies and who are our friends, and at base this question requires a clear analysis of class and nation within U.$. borders. Write to us for a copy of our labor aristocracy study pack to get a more in depth understanding of this important point.

The Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) was created to help prevent sexual assault and sexual harassment inside U.$. prisons and to hold fully accountable those found guilty of sexual misconduct. But is this really the case? I beg to differ with those who fully support PREA.

As a transgender woman, I am victimized daily in one way or another at the hands of my fellow prisoners and staff. I should feel free to report sexual assault/sexual harassment, but the fact is, I’m afraid to or at least reluctant to do so. The pigs in authority here in this particular gulag have decided to create a stipulation that prevents me from coming out of my cell without being video/audio recorded via hand-held camcorder. I am being told that it is for my safety and that of others. I say bullshit. This is retaliation at its finest, subtle and cloaked.

I am at the fascists’ mercy for shower, yard, law library and anything else out of my cell. If my captors decide they don’t feel like going through the motions with the camera (which is often) they simply have to claim that the camcorder is unavailable and/or out of service for the time being. Thus my right to shower, yard, law library, etc., is more often than not violated. I’ve pointed out numerous times that there are video cameras in every area of the prison, and there isn’t a spot in this place that I can go that is beyond the view of a camera, but the pigs say that audio is needed for my claims of sexual harassment. When I point out that a majority of my sexual harassment allegations occurred when I was inside my cell, they have nothing more to say, as I’ve tripped them up in their own game.

It’s simple. Things like this are done to discourage anyone from reporting any type of PREA violation whether it happened or not. Fear of retaliation alone is a violation of PREA standards. I wonder just how many others are experiencing this type of issue and what as a whole, we can do about it. Any suggestions, comrades?

MIM(Prisons) responds: Gender oppression is one of many forms of abuse faced by prisoners in the Amerikan criminal injustice system. While the PREA laws appear on the surface to take this problem seriously, we have seen that in practice PREA is more about image than action. And this is not the first report we have received about manipulation of the PREA laws to actually harm those who are experiencing the sexual harassment. We have written previously about PREA and the problems of sexual assault in prisons. Our overall conclusion is that we can not rely on the oppressors to enact policies that will stop oppression. Instead we look to the example of groups like Men Against Sexism, an organization in Washington prisons in the 1970s, to defend against sexual assault and change the culture of what was acceptable among prisoners. Organized action by the oppressed at a group level is necessary to overthrow patriarchy.

The details of all the events that led up to my incarceration as a political prisoner are too numerous to list in this letter, but I assure you, they are atrocious. The basic gist of it is that after repeated attempts to corrupt me and indoctrinate me as an oppressor, and my subsequent refusal and threats to report my knowledge of corruption within my department to federal law enforcement authorities, officials from my department erroneously charged me with setting fire to multiple abandoned and condemned houses that were being used as dens for drugs and prostitution. This is all a vicious lie concocted by the government.

Having faith in the old saying “the truth shall set you free” and the belief that we are innocent until proven guilty in this country and will receive a fair and honest trial, I chose to fight my case in our so-called criminal justice system or, as I quickly discovered, the criminal Injustice system.

I was informed very arrogantly by the investigators (Birmingham police officials) that they had “hand picked” the judge who was over my case and if I didn’t accept a plea deal then this particular judge was going to “crush” me. The judge himself even told me that if I accepted the plea deal he would show me mercy, but if I rejected the plea deal and took my case to trial then “there would be no mercy.”

Refusing to be bullied and intimidated into confessing to crimes that I did not commit and begging for mercy when I had done nothing that required it, I proceeded to trial. After an unfair and totally biased and one-sided monkey trial in a Kangaroo court (it took me a while to realize I wasn’t at the zoo), I am now firmly of the opinion that D.A. stands for “Disinformation Agent” and that our judges have even less honor than a thief in the night. I was not allowed to present video evidence that proved my innocence and showed intimidation and coercion by police officials. Unfortunately, I was wrongfully convicted and sentenced to 100 years in prison.

I am not submitting my story as an invitation to any pity party, but merely to attest to the corrupt and broken system that I’m ashamed to say I once worked for. A system that sends a man to prison for 100 years for non-violent property crimes where no death or injury occurred; crimes that he didn’t even commit.

Now that I am condemned to rot in prison for the rest of my life while my two young sons remain orphaned since I was their only parent, I guess that I’m just supposed to accept my fate. Well, my eyes are wide open now which is why I believe in and uphold the 6 points of MIM(Prisons) and the 5 principles of the United Front for Peace in Prisons.

MIM(Prisons) responds: This writer gives us a good example of why we say that we must judge people by their actions and not just their history. People are capable of learning and changing. Someone who was formerly working for the oppressors can realize their mistake and join the cause of the oppressed. Most often this happens when someone loses their position of privilege, but sometimes it can happen just through education.

During the Chinese Cultural Revolution some people were imprisoned for anti-people activities and provided with education about why it is wrong to oppress other people. And we have examples of people who came out of these prisons devoted to serving the people, thoroughly ashamed of their former harmful actions and committed to change. This education is easier when we have state power and the government is working in the interests of the oppressed, but even now we can score victories, especially behind bars, with those who came to prison with erroneous ideas and participated in actions that harmed the people. For this reason we must judge people not by what they say, or by labels they have been given, but by their actions. Those who demonstrate to be consistently working on the side of the oppressed have a place in the revolutionary united front.

As a Black nationalist and a member of the Nation of Gods and Earths (NGE), I identify politically as Socialist. See my nationalism is on the lines of Pan-Afrikanism in alignment with the RBG and Global Panther movements. I push the Panthers 10 point program, though I be considered a Political Prisoner under the 8th demand of the 10 point program. I am a force of change even in here, by having intellectual exchanges regularly with members from all ethnic background and mindsets, sharing books full of facts about revolutionary struggles, facilitating a weekly NGE meeting where 23 prisoners discuss positive change ideals for the family units and communities.

We discuss a new underground railroad; as a network of Blacks, Asians, whites, and islanders inviting Latin@ immigrants into our homes for hiding purposes if and when the mass deportation starts taking place. We recognize we the oppressed nations in the United Snakes aren’t several groups divided by race and ethnicity, but one group oppressed by capitalism in an effort to create a new economic slave class of citizens who barely survive while corporation owners benefit from the labor of these masses and live lives of lavish ecstasy. We have to unite as one with the Third World nations under the umbrella of Socialism. We are going to change law through proposing new legislation, creating a more equal legal system for our advancements as a single people, with one universal goal and intention “Self Rule & Self Govern”.

This is Revolutionary and will take the effort of the people to become self-educated in these crucial areas. Taking our united fight to the floor of the United Nations and to every block in every country known to man.

Know you not that Governments are insurgent forces feeding off of the progress of the masses. There is no freedom under capitalistic rule, because everything has a price in a capitalistic society and so freedom is way too expensive for the common man.

We strive for the power to go from thought to product with outside help, from concept to conception without enlisting our oppressors. After 500 years we haven’t created one gun, produced one car, owned one textile company, sent one astronaut to the moon by our self; we’ve done absolutely nothing to advance our independence from our oppressors. Not because we love them so much we don’t wanna leave them but because the global system built around us has grown so much over the years that no matter where you are in this world, the effects of this government are felt and the ways of oppression continue to change due to its appetite and need.

Black Nationalism is not a hate group, based on racism. No we want all people to take care of their own, mate within their own and know about there own greatness. We also want this for ourselves.

MIM(Prisons) responds: This study group is serving as a think tank, coming up with original ideas that clearly demonstrate their internationalist framework. Engaging the masses in developing these ideas is an important task for developing the leaders of tomorrow’s revolution. MIM(Prisons) works to leverage our own resources by providing material and ideological support to projects like this. If you’re in prison, work with us to build a local study group. If you’re on the outside you can help us promote independent institutions of the oppressed like this one by donating books, money for postage and printing, typing services, helping to fight censorship battles and by getting involved in our prisoner correspondence work.