MIM(Prisons) is a cell of revolutionaries serving the oppressed masses inside U.$. prisons, guided by the communist ideology of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.
Under Lock & Key is a news service written by and for prisoners with a focus on what is going on behind bars throughout the United States. Under Lock & Key is available to U.S. prisoners for free through MIM(Prisons)'s Free Political Literature to Prisoners Program, by writing:
MIM(Prisons) PO Box 40799 San Francisco, CA 94140.
I’m at the most racist prison in Georgia, Hays State Prison. I am
currently on lockdown in the Tier 2 program (long-term solitary
confinement) and the other day they shook down a prisoner’s room and
found two knives. Being that this is a lockdown the Unit Manager Reids
and the Lieutenant Jones were pissed because we’re not supposed to even
have a way to get a knife, plus sharpening them. And there are 7 or 8
cameras in the dorm, so they can’t hide this like they used to back in
the days when there were no cameras.
They have to report this to the Warden and log it in the log book for
everyone to see. They were so mad at this prisoner that they took it out
on the dorm by keeping the dinner trays outside the dorm for an hour and
a half. Other prisoners in the dorm made a statement to the dorm saying
that we all should refuse these trays and make them go get us new hot
trays instead of those cold ones outside. Everyone agreed and when the
officer came in to pass out the trays (a racist officer) everyone
started screaming “We don’t want those cold trays! Go get more trays.”
When the Lieutenant came in he threatened to give out a DR (disciplinary
report) to any prisoners who refused to take a tray.
The goal is to not take the trays. If one person takes the trays then no
one will get new trays, and we refused our tray by choice. But if no one
takes the trays then they have to go get new trays. They have to feed
us. So things were going good, the first 5 rooms refused, until
Lieutenant got to the 6th one. He took his tray, then two more rooms did
after that. Others were refusing but like I said when one takes a tray
it’s pretty much a failed mission.
My Brother in the room with me and my two other Brothers next door said
they was going to get their trays since a few took theirs. They didn’t
want to go unfed on a weekend where we only get fed two times. I told
them “Hell naw! Just because the others took theirs that don’t mean we
give up an fold! If we got to go hungry and starve just to let the white
man know we as Blacks and as prisoners won’t go for anything then so be
it. We have to sacrifice for the greater purpose.”
True, my stomach was touching my back. But I was ready to starve just to
show the white man he does not rule me mentally. But unfortunately when
the trays got to my two Brothers’ room they took them. Then they were in
front of our door and my roommate grabbed me one and passed it to me. At
first I was going to refuse, well I wanted to, but seeing the tray with
food I gave in.
While we were eating, the Lieutenant came to our door and said “Good
boys. Y’all keep being good.” That made me feel so bad and embarrassed.
I let the white man win another war. He made me feel so low like I’m a
mutt and he told me to sit, I obeyed, and he rewarded me with a bone and
said “good boy.”
I was mad at myself. I should have refused the tray even if it means I’m
the only one refusing. At least I will feel good about myself and what I
did for my self-respect. But I didn’t. Another Black man falls to the
worst side of a white man. Why are we so weak-minded? Why can’t we
Blacks stick together against oppressors? Why do we fall for their
Willie Lynch tactics?
“My Brother is my Brother and I am my Brother’s keeper.” “2 Black minds
are stronger than one, and one strong Black mind is better than none.” I
guess I needed that extra mind to motivate me to go further with the
protest. And when it didn’t I folded, because of feeling alone,
vulnerable and hungry.
That day I told myself that won’t happen again. If I have to starve by
myself then I will. Our ancestors went through much more worse than
this. I won’t fail them again.
MIM(Prisons) responds: This comrade provides us a good example of
self-reflection and learning from our mistakes. Even the best
revolutionaries won’t be perfect all the time, in fact we will make many
mistakes. But the key is always keeping an open mind to learning from
these errors. And also learning from the successes and mistakes of
others. This was essentially what the Great Proletarian Cultural
Revolution was about in China: encouraging people not to blindly accept
what their leaders said and instead to be critical of incorrect actions
and political line, and to learn from mistakes. During this period in
China prisoners were offered an opportunity to learn from their errors,
undertake serious self-criticism, and return to society as productive
members. Although we don’t currently live under a Socialist government
which is encouraging and enabling these progressive practices, we can
still learn and grow, as this comrade bravely demonstrates.
I was brought here on a boat, took away from my kind They had me
shackled in some chains, but couldn’t lock up my mind Stripped me of
the vision, and told me follow the blind I gave ’em blood sweat
tears, and they ain’t give me a dime
They wanna see me in a cage, and wouldn’t allow me to vote I’ts cold
sweat and nightmares of my neck in a rope I see they took away my
job, and replace it with dope Assassinate the revolution and replace
it with hope
No more Black Panthers, cops flood the strip And the cars plus
jewels, turn to chains and whips Just a slave to the game, with the
name of pimps Rebloodicans at war with the democrats
They wanna stop all the crime? Who told you that? No jobs, no
schools, no control’n that Sending troops thru your land, who showed
you that The same person selling’ dreams, that a hold you back
Here is an example of choosing a small winnable battle by utilizing a
United Front theory in practice among prisoners of Arkansas Department
of Corrections (ADC), organized to overcome the oppressive penal system
about the human right to wear facial hair. In January 2015, the U.$.
imperialist supreme court ruled that ADC could not prohibit prisoner
Gregory Holt from growing facial hair for religious reasons. Prior to
this ruling prisoncrats argued that prisoners could hide contraband in
their hair or beards. With the above court ruling, prisoners had to
apply for a religious accommodation script in order to sport a beard. In
the spirit of revolutionary change, the prisoners within Arkansas
collectively organized and filed 5,600 applications requesting a
religious accommodation. Also there were 607 grievances that protested
that all prisoners should be allowed to wear facial hair. Because of the
surge of prisoner requests and grievances ADC asked the board to remove
the restriction, allowing all ADC prisoners to wear beards. Beginning 14
January 2016 all ADC prisoners were allowed to wear facial hair. It just
goes to show the power of a United Front, when prisoners put their
differences aside to accomplish a common goal.
MIM(Prisons) responds: This is a good example of the power of
united action, even in prison where the people have so little power. One
element of a United Front that is critical to anti-imperialists is
revolutionary leadership. While it is possible for people to come
together under even reactionary leadership to effect change, it is
revolutionary leadership that makes it possible to consolidate the
lessons of the organizing work and push forward from a basic unity
around one issue to a broader unity to build a movement that can take on
the criminal injustice system. This comrade’s example of the fight to
wear a beard is a very good starting point. It is an issue that unites
many, and beard restrictions are generally religious repression covering
for national oppression, disguised as a security issue. We can expose
how this repression fits into the broader problem of national
oppression, which the Amerikan prison system reinforces. As people see
their power to come together to effect change, and understand the system
behind the individual problems they are fighting, we can gain more
supporters and activists in the anti-imperialist struggle.
Solitary Supermax has become me Senses numbed, mind gone
crazy Losing it, lost it, am lost Freedom you say? How much does
it cost? May I pay in this sweat drip from my brow Years alone or
my tired soul? You must tell me how But don’t even whisper, “Accept
the way this system is” Not a chance you greedy imperialistic
pigs Open the Mexican border, leave the Middle East alone Downsize
these concentration camps, let my people go! Money, money, that’s all
you’re about Amerikkka’s guilty, the gavel comes down.
There is no justice for the Black man in the United $tates. “All black
people, wherever they are, whatever their crimes, even crimes against
other blacks, are political prisoners because the system has dealt with
them differently than with whites.” - George Jackson
The only way to receive justice is to fight. The comrades in prison will
have to fight from a different position. They would have to build cadres
to take on different tasks. All collectives through a mass line will
organize the masses around the problems of their particular prison.
Every cadre should have different responsibilities.
For example, there should be a cadre responsible for studying the
psychological warfare that is implemented by the correctional officers
and finding ways to combat it on a peaceful level. Another would study
prisoners’ rights and be ready to challenge all violations. A cadre
would write down all injustices that are manifested by the officers and
pass information on to the cadre leaders. A cadre should be in contact
with outside sponsors that can help our struggle by bringing to light
our problems to the public. All cadres are just components to the
machine. These are only examples.
We must continue the fight, especially on these plantations. However, we
have to be on point and tighten our security to protect ourselves from
agent provocateurs who claim to be on our side but are actually on the
side of the oppressor. Be mindful of those who are always showing up at
all the religious services, hoping to identify radical prisoners who may
speak at these gatherings. These agents are only there to ear hustle so
they can report back to their masters (prison administration). You will
be able to identify some of them through their actions. They’re always
preaching about Black history and Blacks uniting, but they are never
doing shit to protect the rights of the prisoners. They speak out
against those who are true vanguards of the people and try to turn the
masses against these warriors by spreading false rumors in hopes to
destroy these men’s work and characters. Please do not be fooled! They
will stop at nothing until their mission for massa is completed. They
are not only working against their own people, they are against the
entire prison population! You will see them trying to cut in or befriend
every group, organization, or nationality to learn what they can about
them. Be very mindful comrades.
There have been many strong Black revolutionaries who have died in
prison for the chimurenga (struggle) and they must never be forgotten.
Comrades like George Jackson, Hugo Pinell, William Christmas, Howard
Tole, James McClain, W.L. Nolen, and the many unknown but dedicated
warriors who have fought and never gave up until their deaths, should
always be loved and remembered. These brothers taught and trained others
to carry on the torch so that the struggle will continue behind these
walls. And in response many of them have suffered and remain in lock up
(SHU) since the 1990s, 80s, and even the 70s because they refuse to
denounce George Jackson!
Majority of the comrades are locked down in long-term isolation (SMU,
ADX, and Pelican Bay), not because they have incident reports, but
because they are carrying the torch and fighting against the injustice
of the Federal and State prisons that our fallen Freedom Fighters gave
their lives trying to destroy. We are not terrorists! We are
revolutionary Freedom Fighters striving to free the people (Black and
white) from the bloody claws of the imperialist monster. All committed
liberators should join among their own kind and work together in
solidarity. Let’s use the comrades that paved the way as examples and
continue fighting together, united with one clenched fist! Can’t stop!
Won’t stop! Long live the guerrillas!
MIM(Prisons) responds: This comrade provides a good example of
how to think about organizing tactics. We start from the assumption that
the only way we can get justice is to fight for it, and then we must
think about how we can be most effective in this fight. One key element
of our organizing should be building unity, as this writer points out.
We can build unity with all who oppose the criminal injustice system,
but at the same time, we strive to put forward the most advanced
political line to help raise consciousness and build a revolutionary
movement. The United Front is an integral part of this movement, but not
all participants will be revolutionaries themselves. This is ok, as we
seek to unite all who can be united in the fight against the criminal
injustice system.
The Essential Stalin: Major Theoretical Writings, 1905-52 Edited with
an introduction by Bruce Franklin Anchorbooks 1972 511 pages
I finally got to read this priceless gem and it lived up to all my
expectations. One of the theoretical weapons in a revolutionary’s
arsenal should always be this book. Many of us have heard the slanderous
claims from many in the “Amerikan left” that attempt to smut up comrade
Stalin’s legacy, and it’s easy to sit back and find fault in someone and
snatch rumors out of thin air while confusing many who don’t know any
better or do not take the time to investigate for oneself what Stalin
brought to the international communist movement. This book that displays
Stalin’s theoretical contributions, from which many new generations of
revolutionaries out in society as well as within prisons can continue to
glean its political nutrients and replenish the movement today and
tomorrow. It is these precious documents which we read from Stalin’s own
hand and in this way we learn where Stalin stood on the major issues.
In his piece “Marxism and the National Question” we learn of some of the
challenges in Stalin’s day with nationalism. At the same time he makes
clear that Marxists of all stripes must support the self-determination
of nations and this includes the right to secede. It is in this piece
where Stalin defines what a nation is. Here in United $tates borders we
have not only the dominant nation of Amerikkka, but also Aztlán, New
Afrika, Boriqua, and several First Nations. Amerikkka, the oppressor
nation, does not recognize the above stated oppressed nations on these
shores and even deals with those of us who raise the banner of our
respective nations by imprisoning us, murdering us and even resorting to
torture in prisons to repress our growing resistance. As Stalin points
out in his piece “Marxism and the National Question”, repressing one’s
language is a form of national oppression and even after we are
imprisoned in Amerika – which in itself is national oppression in
today’s capitalist society – our languages are repressed, many Spanish
words, Mexican indigenous languages like Nahuatl, African Swahilli and
other native languages are considered “gang activity” if spoken in many
Amerikkkan prisons. Thus our national oppression in Amerika follows us
to our grave as even in the most repressive dungeons or torture
facilities our national oppression continues!
Stalin’s piece “The Foundations of Leninism” defines Leninism but also
exposes Trotskyism’s shortcomings. As Stalin states in this piece
Leninism is the “tactics and strategies of the proletarian revolution”
and “the tactics and strategies of the dictatorship of the proletariat”
and this is so because Lenin took Marxism and applied Marxist theory to
the material world. Marx was unable to see his theories come to fruition
so Lenin applied Marxism to Russia and developed more tactics that
remain weapons in the arsenal of the people today. Stalin’s piece
highlights Lenin’s contributions to the international communist movement
(ICM).
The dictatorship of the proletariat is explained as the bourgeoisie
being on the receiving end of suppression while the formerly exploited
are now doing the suppression. The Soviets (councils) are explained as
well where, like United Struggle from Within (USW), these mass
organizations worked to unite different peoples in a forward motion to
the path of revolution. “The Foundations of Leninism” has a great depth
to it that includes many principles of Leninism among which was Lenin’s
stance on the national question, particularly Lenin’s position on
self-determination of the oppressed nations. Stalin gets to the heart of
this point when he states:
“Formerly, the principle of self-determination of nations was
usually misinterpreted, and not infrequently it was narrowed down to the
idea of the right of nations to autonomy. Certain leaders of the second
international even went so far as to turn the right to
self-determination into the right to cultural autonomy, i.e., the right
of oppressed nations to have their own cultural institutions, leaving
all political power in the hands of the ruling nation. As a consequence,
the idea of self-determination stood in danger of being transformed from
an instrument for combating annexations into an instrument for
justifying them.”(p. 146)
This is powerful and validates what many comrades here have discovered
about many “parties” in Amerikkka, who use the idea of
self-determination as an instrument for promoting oppression. Groups
like the crypto-Trotskyist Revolutionary Communist Party, USA (RCP=U$A)
have in fact used self-determination in this exact way. Indeed, if you
look at RCP=U$A line, they disagree with the Chican@ nation having a
right to self-determination and instead they line up with the Second
International and promote the idea of Aztlán being reduced to an
“autonomous” region within North America. This, as Stalin reveals, is
only a slimy way of RCP-U$A attempting to use the idea of
self-determination as an instrument for justifying annexation and
oppression.(1)
In “Dialectical and Historical Materialism” comrade Stalin introduces us
to Marx and Engels’s thought on dialectics and how historical
materialism is the application of dialectical materialism in order to
study and thus transform society. Dialectical materialism is the process
of identifying and then using contradictions to transform our concrete
conditions, for example the United $tates government has us locked in
these dungeons, in solitary confinement, in slave conditions in order to
stifle our advancement mentally, to smother our resistance. When we are
locked in these chambers it is to neutralize our ability to rebel, to
think, and learn from others while teaching, and to feel the sacred bond
of unity! When we turn these torture chambers into revolutionary
institutes, where we study the science of revolution, and use prisons as
re-education camps, where we learn real history and begin to understand
our oppression, this is dialectical materialism in practice! It is using
the state’s tools of oppression instead to liberate our minds! This is
as Stalin describes going from quantitative change into qualitative
change or as Engels put it “quantity is transformed into quality.”
Contradictions exist in all matter and phenomena, in the United $tates,
in the world, in Amerikkka’s prisons, in lumpen organizations, in
people’s ideology and behavior, etc., and in order to advance any matter
or phenomenon one first needs to identify the contradictions.
“Dialectical and Historical Materialism” teaches us this process and
thus helps us advance our struggles. Lenin said dialectics is the
“struggle of opposites”, and this struggle must occur in order for
development to take place. Mao understood this “struggle of opposites”
and he said: “We are confronted by two types of social contradictions –
those between ourselves and the enemy and those among the people
themselves. The two are totally different in their nature.”(2) This
struggle of opposites must take place if the people are to develop. But
grasping dialectical and historical materialism is useless if at some
point we don’t put this understanding to practice!
There are much more documents and lessons to be learned within “The
Essential Stalin”, so much to be grasped and applied to today’s
contradictions wherever we may be.
Book Review: Marxism, Orientalism, Cosmopolitanism Gilbert
Achcar Haymarket Books 2013
In part one of this review i addressed the author’s apparent
disdain
for the anti-imperialist Islamic movement. In this concluding
article i will expose the author’s First World chauvinism as being at
the root of his reactionary perspective by explaining how he uses the
Christian liberation vs. Islamic fundamentalist concept in religion and
politics today from a Marxian perspective, so as to better prepare the
reader for his ideas on “internationalism” and “ultra-nationalism” by
which he really means revolutionary nationalism. As such, it would seem
that the entire premise of this book was not intended as a supplemental
analysis of anti-imperialist politics in the Middle East today, but so
that the author can push his crypto-Trotskyist agenda. Crypto-Trotskyism
is a term used to refer to organizations that exhibit Trotskyist
tendencies, but which don’t admit to being Trotskyist. Most
significantly they suffer from the same great nation chauvinism as the
other Trots: over-emphasizing the role of the oppressor nation working
classes, and under-emphasizing the role of liberation struggles of the
oppressed nations.(1)
The author begins the final essay of this book titled “Marxism and
Cosmopolitanism” by tracing the very hystory of the word
cosmopolitanism. He discusses how it went thru many twists and
turns, from its beginning in ancient Greek civilization thru the Middle
Ages and up until today; at one point progressive, while regressive at
another. Hence, we learn that the terms cosmopolitan and globalization
are connected in this regard. We also learn that Marx and Engels shared
Achcar’s disdain at one point or another for any and all national
movements, in particular for those centered in the capitalist periphery,
preferring, instead to champion the cause of the global proletariat,
which in their lifetimes meant focusing on European workers. As a
result, Marx and Engels contributed to popularizing the concept of
cosmopolitanism as interchangeable with international proletariat, which
to many communists of the time was preferable to mentioning by name the
plight of English or German workers because of the obvious connotations
to nationalism. Such connotations were seen by most as giving legitimacy
to nationalist struggles, which at the time were driven by the national
bourgeoisie.
Within this context nationalism was viewed as backward and reactionary
for the proletariat, as the national bourgeoisie was using this concept
to their advantage by inciting the proletariat to kill and be killed by
workers of other countries, for the bourgeoisie’s goal of world
domination. The communists on the other hand rejected nationalism,
considering themselves staunch internationalists; champions of the world
proletariat, whose hystoric mission it was to usher in the socialist
stage of communist development. This being the accepted theory of the
time, well before Mao posited that in the age of imperialism,
nationalism of the oppressed nations is internationalism.
All this is important to remember when assessing the text as it pertains
to the whole reason why Achcar even wrote this book. More so, it is
important to remember because in the following pages the author uses
much of this information to attack the practice and political line of
Joseph Stalin. And while it is undeniable that Marx and Engels at one
point agreed with many of the ideas that Achcar propagates, it is also
undeniable that as reality progressed, so did Marx and Engels’ thinking,
which is more than we can say for Mr. Achcar. So if we want to learn the
genuine Marxist stance on nations and nationalism then we should not
limit ourselves to what the founders of scientific socialism had to say
on these topics early on in their revolutionary careers. Rather, we
should study and learn what they advocated and stood for later in their
lives once they became full-fledged Marxists. As such, the line that
Achcar is pushing is a disingenuous one in which he proclaims that all
nationalism, just like all variants of revolutionary Islam, are
inherently bad, when in reality it is the nationalism of the oppressor
nations and the Western privilege that comes with it that he upholds. As
such, Gilbert Achcar should just come out and say what he really thinks;
which is that the nationalism of the oppressed is what he believes to be
backward and reactionary, while oppressor nation nationalism is
inherently progressive due to its linkage to Europeans, their culture
and tradition. Thus, just as the author correctly pointed out in
“Religion and Politics today from a Marxian Perspective,” that Islamic
fundamentalism is a concept that can be divided into one that is
collaborationist with Western interests and one that is hostile to
Western interests, so is nationalism a concept that can be divided into
one that is bourgeois and reactionary, and one that is revolutionary and
forward looking.
“Cosmopolitanism” as Anathema: the Stalinist Perversion
Trotskyists of various stripes have always hated on Stalin for a
multiplicity of reasons, primarily however for his theory of socialist
development. As Stalin’s line on socialist development progressed it
eventually came to stand for the national liberation struggles of the
oppressed nations, not only within Europe but outside the continent as
well. He correctly saw the revolutionary character of the
anti-imperialist movement in the colonies as both hostile to Western
interests and potentially pro-Soviet. Trotsky on the other hand had
nothing but contempt for Asians, Africans and Latin@ Americans,
believing them too backward and weak to ever launch successful
liberation struggles and/or engage in socialist construction absent the
immediate help of the European working classes, a theory that was proven
incorrect when an onslaught of colonial countries broke free of the
imperialist framework following the end of World War II. And so it is
within the context of “globalization” and anti-imperialist struggles in
the 21st century that Gilbert Achcar now attempts to rehabilitate
Trotsky’s theory of the world revolution led by the so-called
proletariat of the advanced capitalist countries vis-a-vis the
rehabilitation of cosmopolitanism; vis-a-vis his criticisms of Joseph
Stalin. To accomplish this however, Achcar must go in depth into the
hystory of the Soviet Union, in particular into the propaganda campaigns
against cosmopolitanism which Stalin had initiated at the end of World
War II, as well as to the campaigns in favor of Soviet patriotism which
Stalin also had initiated to prepare the Soviet masses for the Nazi
invasion.
According to Mr. Achcar these campaigns were nothing more than a cover
for Stalin’s anti-Semitism. Yet interestingly enough, in making these
accusations the author inadvertently puts forth a plausible explanation
for the oppression of notable Jews during this period in the Soviet
Union; thereby paving the way for a materialist explanation of these
actions and the clearing of Stalin’s name as far as anti-Semitism goes.
Achcar like so many anti-communists before him cannot contain his
contempt for the progress made under Stalin and so he jumps on the
bourgeois bandwagon of blaming Stalin for the so-called Jewish pogroms
that were said to have taken place beginning in 1949 alongside the
further elaboration and popularization of Soviet patriotism as a concept
over that of cosmopolitanism. In addition, the author also contends that
these campaigns were one and the same as the so-called anti-Marxist
movement which supposedly took place during this period. What these
campaigns actually represented however were struggles in the realm of
ideas between revolutionaries and counter-revolutionaries battling for
the “hearts and minds” of the Soviet masses, and indeed the future of
the revolution.
According to Achcar, the cosmopolitans appear to have been something
like a Trotskyist sect operating inside the USSR, who were agitating
around the need for openness with the West and glorifying the West. Now
remember, this is 1949 and the Cold War is cracking, all of the Soviet
Union’s wartime imperialist allies have retrained their guns on the
communists. And although the author certainly doesn’t say it, the
Communist Party under Stalin certainly believed that these
“cosmopolitans” were in the service of Amerikan imperialism carrying out
intelligence gathering activities and engaging in building public
opinion for counter-revolution and coup d’etat, just like the types of
activities that CIA sponsored groups carry out in Third World countries
with anti-western governments. It would seem then these cosmopolitans
and other so-called “Marxists” were actually involved in sabotaging
socialism from within with actions which thoroughly alarmed the Soviet
government. But according to Achcar these were the real “Marxists,” the
real “internationalists” because they followed the teachings of the
young Marx; but when did Marx ever speak of colluding against a
socialist state?
Furthermore, the author states that in analyzing Stalin’s anti-Semitism
we cannot afford to begin in the post-war period, but must start with
the publication of Marxism and the National Question, which
Achcar describes as “a superficial and dogmatic essay on this most
complex of questions.”(2) Stalin denies the existence of a Jewish nation
within Europe’s borders, based on the Jewish people’s lack of a common
territory. Apparently Gilbert Achcar disagrees with the Marxist
definition of nations preferring instead Otto Bauer’s The Question
of Nationalities and Social Democracy, which clearly defines Jews
as a nation based solely on their “common cultures” by which they should
really just say religion. The author further claims that it is in this
hystorical period that Stalin began his first anti-Marxist campaigns in
which he sought to squelch all opposition and secure his position of
power. Achcar goes on to argue that Stalin’s ideas on internationalism
reflected only a narrow and selfish outlook which took into account only
the internationalism of the “pan-Tsarist” Russia organization of the
Russian Social Democratic Labour Party when, in Marxism and the
National Question, he mentioned the principle that the party strove
to “unite locally the workers of all nationalities of Russia into
single, integral collective bodies, to unite their collective bodies
into a single party.”(3) In defending this principle Achcar states,
“Stalin launched a fierce attack on nationalism, putting Great Russian
chauvinism on equal footing with the nationalism that was expanding
among oppressed nationalities in the USSR - in a definitely non-Leninist
fashion.”(2) However, this is an extreme misrepresentation of Stalin’s
line on Achcar’s part. Stalin criticized the national chauvinism that
was beginning to develop among some of the more reactionary sectors of
the oppressed nations in the Tsarist empire and certainly not the
nationalism of the oppressed themselves. Apparently, the author believes
that national chauvinism should only be criticized when it originates
with the oppressors and by people of the offending nation themselves and
not by anyone else. In other words, only Russians can criticize Great
Russian chauvinism and only the oppressed nations can criticize any
chauvinism that originates within their own nations. This is certainly
an ironic point that those who have actually read Marxism and the
National Question will note. But Stalin was right to criticize the
chauvinism of the oppressed nations in the old Russian empire,
especially when that chauvinism has the potential to foment violence
amongst the oppressed. Chauvinism is chauvinism no matter who propagates
it.
Later on Mr. Achcar comes out with an ass-backwards refutation of
Stalin’s theory of socialism in one country first, attempting to tie it
back to Stalin’s “anti-Semitism” (Achcar’s term for his denial of a
Jewish nation) and Soviet patriotism. The line goes as follows:
“Socialism in one country: this theoretical innovation central to
Stalinism actually laid the groundwork for a Soviet patriotism, coupled
with a sui generis internationalism that amounted in fact to the
internationalism of Soviet patriotism. Communist members of ‘bourgeois
nations’ had a duty to identify with the thriving ‘fatherland of
socialism.’ Indeed, their Soviet patriotic duty could very well have
taken as its motto ‘our country, right or wrong!’”(4)
The following paragraphs is where accusations of Jewish repression and
anti-Marxism by Stalin really gets interesting.
To give some real context to these accusations, which Achcar himself
provides, I will say that prior to the beginning of the Second World War
an expansive campaign was begun in the Soviet Union to create and
solidify a hegemonic Soviet patriotism for the explicit purpose of
strengthening the bonds and common interests of the Soviet Republics
against the impending threat of fascism. Stalin was well aware that not
only the German fascists, but the soon to be imperialist allies were all
working hard to divide the Soviet people from within on the basis of old
national grievances which were common under the Tsar. And, as stated
earlier, there were counter-revolutionaries inside the USSR consciously
working against the Soviet masses. These were the cosmopolitans who by
and large were composed of “real Marxists.” The struggle between the two
opposing forces is recounted and explained by Achcar:
“The patriotic mutation was brought to completion after the Soviet Union
entered the Second World War, engaging in what the Stalinist regime
called the ‘Great Patriotic War.’ This went along with the
rehabilitation of the Greek Orthodox Church and the resurrection of
Slavophilism.”Soviet Patriotism” became a highly praised virtue in the
Soviet Union and in the world communist movement while Stalin’s brand of
‘internationalism’ reached its logical conclusion in the 1943
dissolution of the Comintern.
“Soviet patriotism mutated into full-fledged chauvinism after Moscow
emerged victorious from the war, especially when the Soviet Union faced
renewed ostracism with the start of the Cold War. It is against this
historical background that the campaign against ‘cosmopolitanism’
unfolded.”(5)
We agree with the decision to disband the Comintern, which was done
because
“it became increasingly clear that, to the extent that the internal as
well as the international situation of individual countries became more
complicated, the solution of the problems of the labor movement of each
individual country through the medium of some international centre would
meet with insuperable obstacles.”(6)
Leszek Kolakowski is then cited favorably by Achcar as giving the
Trotskyist perspective of these events:
“In 1949 the Soviet press launched a campaign against ‘cosmopolitanism’,
a vice that was not defined but evidently entailed being anti-patriotic
and glorifying the West. As the campaign developed, it was intimated
more and more clearly that a cosmopolitan was much the same thing as a
Jew. When individuals were pilloried and had previously borne Jewish
sounding names, these were generally mentioned. ‘Soviet patriotism’ was
indistinguishable from Russian chauvinism and became an official mania.
Propaganda declared incessantly that all important technical inventions
and discoveries had been made by Russians, and to mention foreigners in
this context was to be guilty of cosmopolitanism and kowtowing to the
West.”(5)
Achcar then describes how, according to Isaac Deutscher, Stalin ordered
a crackdown on Jews in the Soviet Union following “massive
demonstrations of sympathy by Russian Jews who in 1948-49 greeted Golda
Meir the first ambassador to Moscow of the newborn state of Israel…”(7)
According to Deutscher the crackdown was in response not only to this
unauthorized public display of support by Soviet citizens, but because
Israel “stunned” Stalin by siding with the West in the cold war. Yet the
author would have us believe that “unauthorized public displays of
support” for a foreign head of state invited to Russia by Stalin would
take precedence in this “crackdown” over that of the machinations of
cosmopolitans and their collusion with a tool of Western imperialism, as
is the sub-text that lies hidden beneath these events. Indeed, just a
paragraph down from this Achcar says that Soviet authorities began to
close down Jewish theaters, periodicals and publishing houses while
purging personnel and arresting various Rabbis and other Jewish public
figures soon thereafter. But aren’t these institutions that which have
been traditionally used by the imperialists to agitate for
counter-revolution in anti-imperialist nations? If Jewish pogroms really
took place, then why is it that only certain people and institutions
were being repressed and not Jewish people as a whole? Clearly these
were political moves with a basis in national security that were
happening and not oppression based on nationality (or religious beliefs)
as Achcar would have us believe. As a matter of fact, when we turn the
page of this book we find a much more coherent and realistic assessment
of these campaigns as detailed by F. Chernov in his article: “Bourgeois
Cosmopolitanism and it’s reactionary role” as published and featured in
Bolshevik, the theoretical and political magazine of the central
committee of the All Union Communist Party (Bolshevik). It begins by
reporting that Soviet newspapers
“unmasked an unpatriotic group of theatre critics of rootless
cosmopolitans, who came out against Soviet patriotism, against the great
cultural achievements of the Russian people and other people in our
country.”
Chernov’s article then states:
“Cosmopolitanism is the negation of patriotism, its opposite. It
advocates absolute apathy towards the fate of the Motherland.
Cosmopolitanism denies the existence of any moral or civil obligations
of people to their nation and Motherland…”
“Present day bourgeois cosmopolitanism with its call for the repudiation
of national sovereignty, with its notions of ‘one-world government,’ the
creation of the ‘United States of Europe,’ etc. is an ideological
‘basis’ and ‘consecration’ of the assembling under the aegis of American
imperialism of the union of imperialists in the name of the struggle
against the toiling masses, against the Soviet Union and peoples
democracies, against the irresistible growth over the entire world of
the forces of socialism and democracy.
“The party unmasked the anti-patriotic, bourgeois-cosmopolitan essence
of servility before the capitalist West. It revealed that this cringing
before foreign countries inevitably leads to national treason and
betrayal of the interests of the Soviet people and the socialist
fatherland. The unmasking of unpatriotic groups of bourgeois
cosmopolitans, the struggle against the ideology of bourgeois
cosmopolitanism, is a striking expression of the concern of the
Bolshevik Party about the education of the toiling masses of our country
in the spirit of life-giving, Soviet patriotism.”(8)
This portion of the essay and the book then end with the statements
that: “With the start of ‘de-Stalinization’ in Kruschev’s Soviet Union,
the eyes of many communists were opened; more accurately, their mouths
were opened, as it is difficult to believe that they had not been aware
of the realities they denounced when the green light finally came from
Moscow…”(9)
“With the end of the Stalinist campaign, ‘cosmopolitanism’ faded away as
a major issue in communist circles, as well as in the public debate in
general…”(10)
Of course it did, but only because the cosmopolitans and other
revisionists were now in power and the Soviet Union was starting on the
capitalist road. The final pages of this book then shift back to
Trotskyist political line as Gilbert Achcar outlines how Marx, Engels
and Lenin thought cosmopolitanism, i.e. proletarian internationalism
charts the course towards communism, i.e. “socialist globalization” and
how national liberation struggles in the Third World “can fit perfectly
in the cosmopolitan struggle for global transformation as necessary
moments of this struggle, as components of the global struggle…”(11)
But when the oppressed nations finally rise up in revolt against
imperialism these national liberation struggles won’t just be “necessary
moments” or “mere components” of the global struggle: but instead will
mark the beginning of a long stage of socialist transition and
development in which the people of Africa, Asia and Latin@ America will
band together in a Joint Dictatorship of the Proletariat of the
Oppressed Nations against the former oppressing and exploiting nations.
In summation, the author opens this book with the chauvinist First World
belief that Western domination of the world brought progress to the
hordes of uncivilized savages and barbarians thru the spread of
Christianity. Apparently, revolution, progress and development are
phenomena inherent only to white people and deliverable in the future
only thru a multi-nation working class approach, led of course by the
workers of the core capitalist countries.
This is why he views with such disgust the success that revolutionary
Islam is having in repelling Western forces, because in those movements
he sees the reactionary and backward Islamic fundamentalists doing what
he says they cannot; engage and win against the imperialists. Likewise,
this is why he cannot stand Stalin and must tear him down, because in
his practice and political line he sees the backward national liberation
and self-determination movements of the oppressed nations as they came
to fruition all throughout the 20th century by using revolutionary
nationalism to establish socialism in their countries and then
vigorously defending it. While the only thing that Trotskyists could do
was complain and criticize that the Soviet Union was moving contrary to
what the young Marx and Engels had envisioned in their early years. Such
is the hallmark of Trotskyism which holds that socialism is impossible
in countries of the Third World before the imperialist countries have
had revolutions. Such is the hallmark of Trotskyism which needs but to
depart from the reality of material conditions and enter the jungle of
idealism to carry out the lofty goals of the white worker elite.
Class is in, I’ll tell you what’s a fuckin sin Niggers don’t know
nothing about their history Ancestors who sacrificed everything is a
mystery If you need education, here comes true emancipation
Lincoln’s a liar, he did not set you free Toussaint scared these
cowards with that move in Haiti Harriet Tubman, Sojourner Truth
Ida B. Wells ministering to the youth Found nowhere in his-story
lesson I’m Rap Educated, class in session Turn my mic up so I
can inform my brothers + sisters onh onh Gang niggers beefing with
gang niggers While these white folks continue to hang niggers
Merck slang 40 tons of cocaine niggers Only ones on the chain gang
niggers My neighbor my brother, the oppressor the enemy I ain’t
falling for the lies of the frienemy I’m equip with the trigger,
know when to pull it Acquire the target, release the bullet Down
the puppetmaster goes He looked surprised, didn’t know I knows
Revolutionary rapper, I’m a Garveyite Don’t fuck with Columbus or
his knights All niggers on this correction bus They use some of
you to fuck over the rest of us Oppressorman, I’m on to your
flimflam No longer can you get me to kill my brother man But I
will slay an entire nation of you Cut down your family tree, your
boys in blue They be your army, assigned to try to harm me I
know about your puppets in black robes and dark suits The courthouse
your slave auction stage where you collect the loot I’m a show these
true soldiers how to salute Grab your gat, put on your boots
There’s a war, you’re the troops Knock Willie Lynch head for a
loop Gather their info, let me help you stack dough Let my
people go, or face the wrong end of this 4-4 Harm one of yours, we
downing ten of yours Including our homies behind your prison
doors We are not your grandfather’s slave Can’t brainwash me
into my own grave Kill off our men so you can conquer our women
Your bible teaches rape the children On the hunt for your Y
chromosomes, extinction of the oppressor it’s on You a Goon, run up
in their home Home invaaassiiinnn, hit ’em in the chest make it cave
in Hunt for the oppressor’s Y chromosomes, exterminate until it’s
all gone Exterminate until it’s all gone. Exterminate until it’s all
gone!
I am reaching out to you all out of sheer respect. There is not enough
of this in our (Black folk) community. Secondly, shout out to the entire
USW, MIM, the conscious Blood, Crip, Gangsta Disciple Black Guerrillas,
Chicano and global prison movements for y’all efforts to advocate and
assist in the struggle. You all, I view as brethren, you who are not
amongst the delusional.
Our (Damu, Cuz, Gangsta Disciple, Black Guerrillas, etc.) war shouldn’t
be amongst or against each other because none of us, the above factions,
didn’t arrive out of happenstance. Poverty, disfunctional homes, no
fathers, Willie Lynch syndrome, ignorance, oppression, the need for
camaraderie and illegal/legal servitude created the machines we operate.
Our mission is to teach the youth and uneducated people around us the
real cause of the revolution. Whether it be just transforming itself. We
have to educate our brothers; not just with codes, hand language (gang
signs), and crime; but knowledge, wisdom and understanding, to actually
fight for a purpose.
The upper class black folk has lost their fire and direction. Since the
oppressor’s foot has been raised from their necks to their backs, they
no longer “care” to fight or contribute to our cause. Dissension is the
beast that no longer bothers them. It is going to take for us all to
inspire, infuse and move the masses. And it starts with those of us
within these quasi asylum institutions and concentration camps our
oppressors hold us captive in. I am not talking about making an
alliance, I simply mean coming together in solidarity. Jessup
Correctional Institution and other prisons around the world are the way
they are because we all, who have the power to control ourselves and
inspire others, won’t take a stand and we continue to accept being in
separation.
I can’t say all the things I really want to because the administration
might place on me the Mumia Gag Act like they have Mumia Abu Jamal.
Snitches, rats, informants, toms and division dictates the quarters we
are all confined to. Divide and conquer has ruled over us far too long.
We know the problem, enemy and war waged against us, so now we have to
help solving it.
I work to inspire all brothers to act in the revolution. No matter your
banner, you all have many soldiers who look up to you and men who will
follow you, the leaders of the lumpen organizations, to the fiery depths
of hell. Why not compel education upon them? Self destruction has ruined
us for years, and in turn we become enforcers of the government when we
continue to let the men and youth we all call our so-called homies, cuz,
and comrades rep with a destructive state of mind. Take much time to
ponder what I said. Remember, blood makes us related but loyalty makes
us family. I leave as I came, in struggle.
MIM(Prisons) adds: This writer’s call for unity amongst lumpen
organizations fits well with the United Front for Peace in Prisons.
There is tremendous potential power in this unity, as is demonstrated in
the California
Agreement to
End Hostilities and series of hunger strikes to fight long term
isolation and group punishments. We hope others in Maryland will step
forward to build unity with this comrade and the various groups behind
bars.