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.
They get mad at my thoughts But how can they get mad at the way I
think? When they’ve placed me in this environment to do just
this To think about the choices To think about the decisions To
think about the past To think about the mistakes To think about
the consequences To think about life To think about death! My
thoughts seem too radical They seem too harsh They seem
insensitive But they don’t seem fake Because they are
real Because my reality is real I think about the joy I think
about the happiness I think about the love I think about the
pain I think about the coldness I think about the hurt Because
I was left alone to think. Can’t cry because it hurts too
much Can’t laugh because it ain’t funny Can’t talk because I don’t
trust nobody to listen So what do I do? The only thing I’m used to
doing, think Think about the future Think about the plans Think
about revenge Don’t be mad because this is what you wanted You
wanted me to think But it didn’t turn out like you wanted Because
you created a smart, calculating righteous monster And its all your
fault Because you didn’t think Of all the possibilities That
came with thinking!
I am a prisoner activist within the Colorado Department of
Corrections, which sees me as a difficult, dangerous individual, and
isolates and represses me in a police-style unit. Within the United
States there is a response to prisoner activism of repression by prison
administrators. This repression may involve some type of physical clash
between prison staff and/or their prisoner stooges, and a prisoner
activist. I put this forth as a counter to your point explicitly
discouraging prisoners from engaging in any violence, as this position
is not based on the reality of prisoner activism in U.$. prisons.
Prisoner activism here typically takes the form of formal institutional
advocacy. Yet white supremacy, capitalism, and imperialism have never
reformed themselves. And the struggle against these forms of oppression
is a struggle for survival and self-defense. The prisoner activist
struggle in the United States is a struggle against genocide.
MIM(Prisons) and its publications explicitly oppose the use of armed
struggle at this time in the imperialist countries (including the united
states). But this is not based on the reality of prisoner activism in
this country, where there is an ongoing protracted intractable race and
class conflict. I look to Under Lock & Key for guidance in
my individual/personal prisoner activism.
MIM(Prisons) responds: This writer sets a good example of working
with us in unity around prison struggles while debating our
disagreements on questions of strategy. In this case the disagreement
comes down to a question of the stage of struggle. We believe that
violence will be necessary to overthrow imperialism, because, as this
comrade says, “white supremacy, capitalism and imperialism have never
reformed themselves.” We will need to dismantle imperialism forcefully;
those in power won’t just step down peacefully.
But we can also see through many historic examples that revolutionaries
who took up armed struggle too soon were quickly repressed, killed
and/or imprisoned, and many times the movements lost more ground than
they gained. We call this premature armed struggle “focoism,” because it
generally fails to first gain the support of the masses and build a
strong revolutionary party and base. However, it is also possible for
communist parties to make strategic errors in taking up armed struggle
too soon before conditions are ready.
In prison we aren’t really talking about taking up a military battle,
but the analogy to violent engagement before conditions are ready is
applicable in a general way. We see that prisoners who are quick to
engage with their fists/weapons, end up in isolation, beaten, or even
killed. These engagements don’t generally win anything except possibly
the respect of peers with whom the person no longer has contact.
This doesn’t mean we tell prisoners to lie down and take abuse. Every
situation is different and we can’t possibly judge what each individual
is facing and how they need to respond to survive. We can say that many
people write to MIM(Prisons) talking about how they used to resort to
their fists first and now they use their pen and voice and are much more
effective with this new approach to fighting repression. It takes
patience and discipline to make this change, and it’s not easy when
faced with both pigs and their lackeys provoking and even attacking.
Rather than debate the appropriate response to each dangerous situation,
the broader point is agreement on our strategic stage of struggle, and
the reality that we can’t win a military/violent battle right now. We
just don’t have the strength yet. And so we need all of our comrades to
stay alive and out of solitary to engage in education and organizing.
“The lumpen has no choice but to manifest its rebellion in the
university of the streets. It’s very important to recognize that the
streets belong to the lumpen, and that it is in the streets that lumpen
will make their rebellion.” - On the Ideology of the Black Panther
Party, Eldridge Cleaver 1970
The recent killing of two New York City (NYC) cops must be viewed as a
conscious act of war taking place within the context of national
oppression, just as the killing of Eric Garner and countless others from
the oppressed internal nations of New Afrika, Aztlán and the various
First Nations at the hands of filthy pigs were and will continue to be
acts of war that the police wage against the oppressed for the dominant
white nation known as Amerika. Yet if we listen to the politicians we
hear them desperately trying to switch the narrative of these killings
as having nothing to do with the wave of recent protests currently being
directed against police brutality and police repression since the murder
of Michael Brown in Missouri on 9 August 2014. Instead they tell us that
these killings are the result of a depraved criminal element who the
police have all along been trying to protect us from.
In a recent public address NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio declared the deaths
of these pigs to be “an attack on all of us” and asked that protesters
put their demonstrations on hold as it was now time to “move forward and
heal divisions.” Others, including the pigs themselves, have called on
protestors to “tone down their language.” One reactionary on a CNN
roundtable even went so far as to categorize the killing of those cops
as “an attack on the very heart of democracy and the people that uphold
that democracy”! And that is a very funny statement to make as i
could’ve sworn that the heart of democracy lies with the people and not
with the special bodies of armed men. Instead of democracy we have power
arising from society which places itself above the people and becomes
more and more alienated from them. These arms of the state have been
tasked with managing the irreconcilability of both national and class
antagonisms.
But why are the politicians so anxious to stop the masses from making
the connection between the state-sanctioned murders of Eric Garner (and
others) and NYC pigs? Because they know that context is everything
regardless of what the pigs, the politicians or any other member of the
liberal and conservative white media have to say. The killing of those
pigs was carried out by a subjective revolutionary force outside of an
objective revolutionary scenario. Therefore, the lesson for us to take
away from this is that the killing of those two cops was undoubtedly
political, just as sure as all prisoners are political.
Does this however mean that we support such a strategy of attacking the
existing power structure absent a revolutionary situation? No, because
that is not an effective way of advancing the needs of the oppressed,
nor does it advance our own revolutionary agenda. What is for sure,
however, is that the death of two of NYC’s “finest” is sure to be used
as another pretext to round up and spy on political activists as well as
to further clamp down on “crime” in the big rotten apple, which directly
translates into more repression for the lumpen.
In The Correct Handling of a Revolution by Dr. Huey P. Newton,
Minister of Defense for the Black Panther Party, Newton hit on the
correct methods of both leadership and struggle within the New Afrikan
community of his time. This analysis still holds good today and
revolutionaries from the oppressed nations should take note:
The vanguard party must provide leadership for the people. It must
teach the correct strategic methods of prolonged resistance through
literature and activities. If the activities of the party are respected
by the people, the people will follow the example. This is the primary
job of the party. …
There are basically three ways one can learn: through study, through
observation, and through actual experience. The Black community is
basically composed of activists. The community learned through activity,
either through observation of or participation in the activity. To study
and learn is good but the actual experience is the best means of
learning. The party must engage in activities that will teach the
people. The Black community is basically not a reading community.
Therefore it is very significant that the vanguard group first be
activists. Without this knowledge of the Black community one could not
gain the fundamental knowledge of the Black revolution in racist
America.
While leaving out some focoist rhetoric characteristic of the BPP which
we fundamentally disagree with, this excerpt is part of the most correct
aspect of the mass line and how we relate to the masses on a day-to-day
and strategic level. V.I. Lenin, leader of the first socialist state,
the Soviet Union, from 1917-1924, dealt with one aspect of the
lumpen-proletariat in his time quite relevant at the present moment –
their tendency to engage in spontaneous and disorganized armed struggle
against the state and in “expropriation” of private property. Lenin
vehemently condemned those Bolsheviks who disassociated themselves from
this by proudly and smugly declaring that they themselves were not
anarchists, thieves or robbers. He attacked “the usual appraisal” (2)
which saw this struggle as merely “anarchism, Blanquism, the old
terrorism, the act of individuals isolated from the masses, which
demoralize the workers, repel wide strata of the population, disorganize
the movement and injure the revolution.”(3) Lenin drew the following
keen lessons from the disorganized period of this struggle:
“It is not these actions which disorganize the movement, but the
weakness of a party which is incapable of taking such actions under its
control. The Bolsheviks (communists) must organize these spontaneous
acts and must train and prepare their organizations to be really able to
act as a belligerent side which does not miss a single opportunity of
inflicting damage on the enemy’s forces.”(4)
In short, it’s not necessarily that we disagree with the actions of
Ismaaiyl Brinsley, rather his timing was off. It is exactly these types
of actions by the oppressed nation lumpen which make them both the hope
of the liberation movements of the internal semi-colonies, as well as
the potential spearhead of the oppressed nations against a rising
fascist threat here in the United $tates. In the end it doesn’t matter
whether these pigs wear cameras or not. What matters is how we respond,
as that is the difference between liberation and more repression.
The decision not to try the pig in Ferguson, Missouri for the killing of
Mike Brown has set the people off, and rightly so. It is a broken record
of this injustice system and its real intention.
When i woke up and turned on the news that first morning and saw the
reaction to the courts not charging the killer cop i was glad that the
people were expressing their dissatisfaction with this system. i say
this system because it is really this system that upholds the ability of
the state to keep on slaughtering the people.
Then i saw that same killer cop in an interview and he straight up says
that he regrets nothing. He is content with shooting a young man in the
face and head who was simply resisting being murdered, resisting the
killer. He was the face of Amerikkka and he offered a real portrait of
what Amerikkka is all about.
The neighborhood that Mike Brown was murdered in was like the
neighborhoods that prisoners come from, it is where most poor people in
the United $tates come from. This is what we experience when we interact
with the state.
There is no excuse for what is occurring in the poor people’s streets.
It is a never ending fusillade of despair unleashed on oppressed people.
And yet we still have so many prisoners who are oblivious to what is
occurring, even though it is occurring in their streets. It’s almost
like folks have blinders on and do not see what is occurring all around
them, not once or twice but daily throughout the United $tates.
Prisoners need to connect the dots and realize that what occurs out in
those streets does pertain to you because these are your people out
there being slaughtered, this is a one sided war that needs to be turned
around. The uprising in Furguson is a response to this and it’s a good
response but people need to respond in so many different ways in order
to declare that these killer cops must stop slaughtering the people.
MIM(Prisons) adds: We join this comrade’s call for more uprisings
like in Ferguson. The people have a right to be outraged at the system
of national oppression in the United $tates. And we must call out this
system clearly for what it is: there is not just a mass of generic poor
people in this country, the poor are disproportionately concentrated in
the oppressed nations. These groups, New Afrikans, Chican@s, First
Nations, along with national minorities like Mexican@s, live in a
country where their neighborhoods are occupied by the imperialist police
force and where they can face death for the crime of walking down the
street.
Connecting the dots for prisoners includes recognizing that it is the
same criminal injustice system that locks up oppressed nations that is
killing people in the streets. The cops, the courts, and the prisons are
all part of this same systematic social control. And so prisoner’s
protesting abuses behind the bars are a part of the larger struggle
against imperialism on the streets. We must make these connections and
keep in mind the broader goals while we fight against day-to-day
oppression behind bars.
Uno de los aspectos más dañinos en las prisiones de EE.UU. hoy en día
son las unidades de control. Unidades de control y aislamiento solitario
son las armas más grandes en su torturante arsenal. Llaman a las
unidades de control SHU, SMU, CMU y varios otros nombres dependiendo en
que estado está uno, pero todos trabajan para emplear tortura a los
capturados retenidos.
Cuando miramos a la historia del sistema de prisiones de EE.UU.
encontramos que las naciones oprimidas siempre han sufrido mucho adentro
de ellas. Presos en los Estados Unidos han sufrido trabajo sin pago,
linchamiento, golpizas, fustigaciones y asesinatos por mencionar
algunos. Aunque mucho de esto continúa - a veces más ocultado y cubierto
que en el pasado - hay otros métodos nuevos de opresión nacional que se
están usando en esta nueva era de dominación amerikana. Yo sospecho que
pos-Obama (supuestamente llamada “pos-racial Amerikkka”) seguiremos
viendo más de estas formas ocultadas de opresión que infligen el mismo
daño, pero que vuelan bajo del radar del ciudadano común del primer
mundo. Esto hace sentir cálidos y cómodos a los liberales y les permite
creer que el “progreso” es obtenible en el centro imperialista.
un tal método empleado contra los presos en calabozos americanos es el
uso de unidades de control. La unidad de control es una cámara de
tortura moderna, pero no se puede anunciar como matador letal de mentes
negras y morenas porque los liberales podrían alzar sus narices a
semejante revelación. En su lugar, al público se le dice que las
unidades de control solo se usan contra los incorregibles, salvajes,
extranjeros, pandilleros o los terroristas sensacionalizados.
¿Quiénes Están Encerrados en las Unidades de Control?
Como a nuestros ancéstros a quien se les habrá preguntado cual fue la
razón por las cadenas en los tobillos, la marca de su dueño en la cara,
o el lazo en su pescuezo, nuestra respuesta, como la de ellos es que les
nace a los abusadores buscar la forma de limitar todos los rebeldes y
revolucionarios que se oponen a la opresión nacional. Últimamente, esto
es lo que logra a uno caer en la unidad de control.
Por supuesto que estamos luchando en contra de una nación opresiva
sofisticada y poner presos en unidades de control está envuelto en
idioma florido. Nos dicen que es por “actividad pandillera” o “amenaza a
la seguridad y bienestar de la institución.” A veces hasta me dicen que
estoy “activamente comprometido en una conspiración criminal que amenaza
la institución, personal y otros presos.” Para la mente no entrenada,
esto puede sonar como justificación para tortura. Este asesinato de
carácter no solamente en falso, pero nada justifica tortura.
¡Absolutamente nada!
Fue solo después que empecé a escribir artículos que alzaban las voces
de los presos y empecé a hacer apelaciones y demandas por los presos que
me apuntaron para meterme en “la unidad de vivienda segura” o el SHU (en
ingles). En breve, cuando comencé a resistir la represión del estado fue
cuando fui aislado incomunicado. Antes de esto, me permitían cometer
crímenes menores y pelear contra otros presos, hasta que empecé hacerme
políticamente consciente. No estoy solo.
La mayoría que trabajan para avanzar y organizar su nación, levantar la
voz por otros, o que se ocupan en ser abogados presidiarios irá a una
unidad de control. Esta práctica es común en la sociedad colonizada: Los
que resisten y tienen influencia política serán encerrados bajo un
opresor colonial.
¿Por Qué el Estado Tiene un Proceso de Validación?
Nuestro opresor debe inventar formas de meternos en unidades de control,
y en California se usa el proceso de validación. El proceso de
validación intenta prestar un aire legal a la tortura y opresión
nacional alegando que aplican un proceso justo y sin prejuicio para
validar alguien como un “afiliado de pandilla.” Decir que este proceso
no tiene prejuicio, es como decir que dejar al zorro que cuide la
gallinera no tiene prejuicio.
El hecho que el proceso de validación sigue usando cosas tan ridículas
como una tarject de cumpleaños, un dibujo Azteca, o un libro escrito por
George Jackson como evidencia de actividad de pandilla comprueba que no
hay nada justo o sin prejuicio de este proceso de validación. Los casos
del tribunal que supuestamente pararon a la prisión de usar estos
artículos demuestra el fracaso que es el sistema de injusticia y como es
una extensión de el estado. Nuestras victorias nunca vendrán del
tribunal del tribunal del “amo de esclavo.”
El sistema de validación ayuda pacificar los presos con el pensamiento
que hay un proceso legítimo que están llevando para parar la tortura.
Que de una forma u otra con paciencia y obedeciéndolos, podríamos salir
del SHU. Claro que esto es absurdo. Nos vamos a quedar en el SHU hasta
que nuestro opresor sienta que no vamos a poner resistencia, hasta que
sientan que nos quebraron. A veces quieren entrenar a sus agentes y
tratan de capturar a todos se asocia con nosotros en la línea central,
como si fuéramos carnada. Pero mientras sigamos resistiendo su opresión,
no nos dejaran asociarnos libremente con la otra gente. El proceso de
validación solo funciona para continuar nuestra opresión nacional.
El Proceso de Renunciación es Más Opresión
Cuando vamos al comité en los SHUs de California, nos dan una forma con
el titulo “aviso de expectativas del CDCR.” Esta forma da una lista de
supuesto comportamiento de los STGs que incluye entre otras cosas
“participación en ejercicios de groupos STGs, usando gestos, saludos de
mano, posesión de arte con símbolos STG.” Tengan aviso que no nos
informan cuales son los símbolos STG.
Básicamente, no podemos socializarnos con nadie, porque nos pueden
acusar de comportamiento STG. No nos dicen quienes están validados como
partes de los STGs ni tampoco nos dan ninguna información de lo que es
comportamiento STG. Simplemente nos dicen que no debemos asociarnos con
STGs o participar en su comportamiento. El estado decidirá si nos
estamos comportando propiamente y permitidos a proceder en el programa
de renunciación. Suponen que ellos son los expertos.
He escuchado que han puesto en este “programa de renunciación” algunos,
pero el estado esta escogiendo selectivamente a quienes coloca en este
programa. En mi opinión es un programa de pacificación y no voy a
participar en el. La participación disfraza la opresión de el estado, a
la misma vez les permite a ellos tratar de forzarnos a hacernos
culpables, de confesar culpabilidad, aunque sea ser culpable de lo que
ellos juzgan tener pensamientos incorrectos.
Noticias recientes de una demanda de clase civil federal que disputa
pólizas y condiciones en el SHU de Pelican Bay son bienvenidas y algo
que todos deberiamos seguir. Ashker et al. v. Governor of California et
al., No C 09-05796 dice que el ser sometido a más de 10 años en el SHU
es cruel e inusual castido y que el proceso de validación es una
violación al debido proceso.(1) Pero aquí esta el culatazo: Si has
participado en el Step Down Program (Programa de Rununciacion) tu no
estás incluido en esta acción civil. Entonces ya estamos viendo como el
nuevo programa de renunciación está sirviendo al estado, haciendo más
difícil para que los presos puedan disputar sus condiciones.
Mi comportamiento no es más incorrecto hoy que el primer día que me
capturaron y me encerraron en el SHU. El estado no me va a soltar del
gancho y no voy a renunciar mi resistencia contra la opresión. El
proceso de renunciación continúa la misma opresión que el proceso de
validación empezó; atenta justificar lo que ellos le hacen a las
naciones oprimidas.
¿Que Terminara la Validación/Programa de Renunciación?
El programa de renunciación no solamente es casi igual al proceso de
validación, pero aquí en California muchas prisiones siguen usando ambos
métodos, por eso necesitamos acabar con los dos.
Desde el principio vi la necesidad luchar para que cierren el SHU>
Desde la primera huelga de hambre yo supe que si no se cierra el SHU
completamente, el estado nos tendrá peleando el mismo problema bajo
nuevos nombres por décadas via pleitos legales y huelgas. Esto nunca nos
logrará a nuestra meta. Necesitamos mantener todas las justificaciones
para el uso de encerramiento solitario en nuestro mira. No importan la
razón porque alguien este en encerramiento aislado, siempre será
tortura, y siempre debería ser opuesto.
A la misma vez hemos hecho mejoramientos a las vidas de muchos presos y
algunos hasta han salido del SHU y por esto estoy feliz. Como sea,
programas de renunciación y validación nos van a seguir teniendo presos
hasta que consigamos hacer que la resistencia a la opresión sea una cosa
común y corriente. Cuando huelgas de hambre ocurran más de una vez cada
diez años, y protestas pacíficas pasen con más frecuencia que una
limpieza general, aun talvez entonces acabaremos con los programas de
renunciación y validación.
MIM(Prisiones) agrega: La mayoría de los civiles dirían que controlar la
violencia pandillera es algo bueno, y esa perspectiva es exactamente lo
que el departamento de correcciones y rehabilitación de California
(CDCR) depende para implementar sus programas de validación pandillera y
programa de renunciación que asumen que todo grupo clasificado como
pandilla se ocupan en actividades criminales y cualquiera en contacto
con la pandilla tiene que ser miembro.
Vamos a dejar de lado la realidad que el ejército Amerikano y la fuerza
policiaca es la pandilla más grande en la historia del mundo. Si hay
alguien organizado en actividad criminal y terrorismo son ellos. Que
cualquier agencia Amerikana reclame estar contra actividad pandillera
sin criticarse a ellos mismos es una broma. Las entidades identificadas
como pandillas por el CDCR incluyen grupos de estudio de correspondencia
como el William L. Nolen Mentorship Program. En Texas, Bajo Clavo y
Llave es citado como un grupo de amenaza contra la seguridad, a pesar de
ser un periódico. El Centro Nacional de Investigación Criminal
Pandillera publicó un reporte que incluyó al Movimiento
Internacionalista Maoista como una potencial amenaza a la seguridad de
las prisiones. Es obvio que el título de pandilla no lo usan para
razones criminales, sino más por razones políticas.
Varias organizaciones cuales no son necesariamente revolucionarias
también están apuntadas como pandillas, sea que rompan leyes amerikanas
o no. La verdadera amenaza no son las actividades en que los grupos se
comprometen, sino el nivel de organización y unidad que muestran.
Títulos de STG y programas de renunciación criminalizan la asociación,
no el crimen en realidad.
El gobierno amerikano hará todo lo posible para proteger su hegemonía
internacional. Controlar cualquier población subversiva entre sus
bordes, especialmente sus semi-colonias internas, es alta prioridad, sin
importarle como lo disfrazan con títulos elegantes y procesos
administrativos.
Marcus Garvey: Black Nationalist Leader by Mary Lawler Holloway
House Books 1990
I had the chance to borrow this book from a New Afrikan prisoner in
order to check out this cat who many believe to have been a main
influence to the Black liberation struggle of the 20th century. One
thing that stood out is almost every other page had a photograph,
including everything from Jamaican slaves, “race riots,” the klan and
Malcolm X.
This book traces the life of Marcus Garvey from his birth on August 17,
1887 in Saint Ann’s Bay, Jamaica. Out of 11 brothers and sisters, only
he and a sister lived past childhood. His stonemason father was known to
be a voracious reader and well respected in the village; his mother was
a farmer who sold what she grew along with baked goods to contribute to
the family. Early on the family owned several properties, but after
legal disputes the family was left with the single property they lived
in.
Garvey’s father was what Lawler described as “A descendant of the
maroons, escaped Jamaican slaves who banded together during the 17th and
18th centuries to fight the island’s British colonial rulers.”(p. 23)
Garvey descended from a line of anti-colonial struggle. The British
slaves killed off all the indigenous Arawak natives and then kidnapped
Africans and used them as slave labor in their plantations all over
Jamaica. Garvey’s relatives were among those who resisted the oppressor.
Because of his father’s profession and his family being landowners,
Garvey was educated in public school as well as by tutors, and took
advantage of his father’s private library which was well stocked with
books, newspapers, and magazines. This was at a time when most Black
people in Jamaica received little to no education. At the age of 15
Garvey went on to work as a printer’s apprentice, and by age 20 he was a
master printer, a skill which he would put to use later in his
propaganda efforts.
Garvey became politicized after moving to Kingston and seeing the
inequality and oppression of Blacks. It was in Kingston where he joined
his first workers’ strike at the print shop where he worked to protest
low wages. At age 22 Garvey joined a group called the “National Club”
that strove for better treatment of Blacks and agitated against British
colonialism. He immediately began working on the national club’s organ
Our Own, which led him to launch his own publication called
Garvey’s Watchman. Garvey’s Watchman didn’t last very
long, but made clear his real purpose and increased his interest in
political organizing.
With big plans and little money Garvey became a migrant worker and set
off for Costa Rica in 1910. Garvey’s thoughts were on Blacks in Jamaica,
but in Costa Rica he saw horrible treatment of Black workers in his
first job for United Fruit. United Fruit is a U.$.-controlled company
that has long wreaked havoc on Latin America. It has left a bloody trail
in its support of brutal dictators while ensuring workers’ rights are
silenced with often deadly results.
The book explains how Garvey’s first job at a banana plantation quickly
led him to fight for workers, even launching a newspaper called La
Nacionale (The National) that expressed workers’ rights.
It wasn’t too effective as most of the workers were illiterate, so these
efforts did not get very far.
After traveling to several Latin American nations and returning to
Jamaica, at age 23, Garvey set sail to England. In England, he again
faced poor work conditions and discrimination. Garvey finally realized
that everywhere he went, regardless of the country, Blacks experienced
oppression. In England he attended college where he met other Blacks who
promoted Pan-Africanism. The Pan-African Movement was created in the
1800s. This was a time when British colonialism held many Black nations
as colonies and the Pan-African movement sought to create Black nations
that were governed by Blacks. The idea was to take Africa back for
Africans.
In 1913 Garvey began work for Duse Mohammed Ali, publisher of
African Times which promoted the rights of Black people. This,
Lawler explains, allowed Garvey to mingle with the movers and shakers of
the Pan-African movement, as most of them wrote for African
Times.
The author writes that after reading Booker T. Washington’s book Up
From Slavery Garvey “found his purpose.” Washington was a known
integrationist who believed Black people should not protest racism, and
instead that eventually the white nation would accept Black people. Many
of the more progressive Black leaders of this period denounced Booker T.
as an Uncle Tom.
In this book we read about Garvey creating the Universal Negro
Improvement Association (UNIA) in 1914. UNIA was to work to unite and
improve Jamaican Black people’s socio-economic conditions while
promoting the anti-colonial struggles of Africa.
The author states about Garvey, “Like Booker T. Washington, he believed
that until the Black workers became committed to self improvement, they
would be looked down upon by whites.”(p. 57)
The author implies that Black people can work within the oppressor
nation’s systems, and claims this will resolve racism from the
oppressor. This system of thinking misses identifying the root of one’s
oppression. To blame the oppressed is to be an apologist for the
oppressor nation and this thinking will never lead to the liberation
that Garvey was lookiing for.
I also found it surprising that Garvey seemed to rely on religion as a
savior. For instance, the author quotes Garvey as speaking on what
helped to better himself, “Nobody helped me toward that objective except
my own mind and God’s good will.”(p. 59) Garvey was also known to
organize religious meetings as the author reminds us. The book suffers
in that the author offers many quotes from Garvey and others but gives
no footnotes as to where these quotes are coming from; this makes many
of the quotes seem suspect.
In 1916 Garvey arrived in Amerika and found in Harlem a more receptive
audience to UNIA than in Jamaica where UNIA only gained under 100
members and financially was unable to launch any independent
institutions.
Garvey soon helped form a New York chapter of UNIA along with a
newspaper Negro World, which served as UNIA’s platform. The
UNIA’s motto was “One God, One Aim, One Destiny,” thus it was steeped in
a metaphysical approach about what would free Black people.
In 1919 Garvey founded a shipping company called “Black Star Line.” This
was created with the intent to obtain Black “economic independence.”
Garvey said, with regard to the Black Star line, “Our economic condition
seems, to a great extent, to affect our general status… be not deceived
wealth is strength, wealth is power, wealth is justice, is liberty, is
real human rights.”(p. 112) Spoken like a true capitalist.
It becomes apparent in this book that Garvey believed Black capitalism
would liberate Black people from the hardships he had witnessed
worldwide. He believed creating and then monopolizing on “Black
industries,” UNIA could supply Black people with furniture and other
goods in South and Central America, as well as the West Indies and
beyond. Garvey encouraged all Black people to invest in UNIA as a step
toward liberating themselves from racism.
In 1922 Garvey was arrested for mail fraud in soliciting investors for
the Black Star Line which had begun to lose business as ships were lost
and investors became suspicious. Garvey was convicted and sent to prison
for a couple of years. Upon release he was deported back to Jamaica
where he attempted to rebuild UNIA. After poor results he moved back to
England to start up a UNIA chapter and it was during this time that a
rift was created between the New York chapter and Garvey himself, which
helped to tarnish UNIA more. Garvey died in England on June 10, 1940 at
age 53. Although he died in poverty his death would bring him a renewed
notoriety in Jamaica and worldwide.
Throughout the book neither socialism nor communism was mentioned once!
I found this odd as this was a time when Russia had just been liberated
under Lenin’s leadership, but then Garvey was not a socialist. Without
socialism a people will continue to be oppressed even if governed by
one’s own people. The masses of people will simply be people oppressed
by their own bourgeoisie. This is bourgeois nationalism, or as Huey
Newton coined it, pork chop nationalism. Revolutionary nationalism which
install socialism once a nation is liberated, thus ensuring the
bourgeois and other capitalist roaders do not get the chance to derail
the revolution.
Garvey did leave a lasting impression on the Black nation in Amerika.
Malcolm X’s father was a Garveyite so Malcolm obviously grew up in
Garvey thought. On the end it can be said Garvey helped to develop more
progressive thought than his own. This book is worth reading as a basic
intro to Marcus Garvey’s political work, but it is important to note it
does not include Garvey’s own writings. Those researching the historical
development of New Afrikans will find some value in this book.
Mail the petition to your loved ones inside who are experiencing issues
with the grievance procedure. Send them extra copies to share! For more
info on this campaign, click
here.
Prisoners should send a copy of the signed petition to each of the
addresses below, which are also on the petition itself. Supporters
should send letters of support on behalf of prisoners.
Warden (specific to your facility)
Office of Inspector General HOTLINE P.O. Box 9778 Arlington,
Virginia 22219
ADC Office of Inspector General Mail Code 930 801 South 16th
Street Phoenix, AZ 85034
United States Department of Justice - Civil Rights Division Special
Litigation Section 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, PHB Washington,
D.C. 20530
Senator John McCain 4703 S. Lakeshore Drive, Suite 1 Tempe, AZ
80282
Representative Raul Grijalva 810 E. 22nd Street, Suite 102 Tucson,
AZ 85713
And send MIM(Prisons) copies of any responses you receive!
MIM(Prisons), USW PO Box 40799 San Francisco, CA 94140
Petition updated January 2012, July 2012, December 2014, October
2017, and April 2019
Che Guevara, A Revolutionary Life by Jon Lee Anderson Grove Press
Books 1997
From de-classed aristocrat, to social vagabond, to communist
revolutionary and legend, Che Guevara, A Revolutionary Life
takes us from Che’s early beginning as a sickly kid with a tremendous
appetite for reading to his miserable last days in the Bolivian
mountains trying to spark a revolution. As far as biographies of
political figures go this one is truly exceptional as Jon Lee Anderson
does an outstanding job of focusing this book not on Che the individual
but on Che the devoted servant of the people. There are just so many
aspects and stages of Che’s life which this book covers that I already
know I won’t have enough space to cover it all. Therefore I will stick
to covering not so much what we already know about Che but what hasn’t
yet been fully understood about him.
With that said, let us travel back in time to Argentina circa World War
II, a country caught between Amerikan imperialism and a rising fascist
influence. Ernesto “Che” Guevara was first turned on to politics as a
young child through his friendships with several other children whose
parents were Spanish migrants fleeing the Spanish Civil War. Che’s
family was also apparently very active in Argentina’s petty bourgeois
political circles. As a result of all these factors Che soon became
semi-political himself, proudly joining the youth wing of Accion
Argentina (Argentine Action), a pro-Allied solidarity group.(p. 23)
However, he wouldn’t really begin developing a critical view of the
world until his teenage years when he was shaped further by the
political turmoil in his own country as well as by his Spanish émigré
friends who had a measurable influence in his life. Years later they
would all belong to local anti-fascist youth cells formed by Argentine
students organizing against the militant youth wing of the pro-Nazi
Alianza Libertadora Nacionalista (National Liberation Alliance).(p. 33)
Besides this political organizing the rest of Che’s high school years
were spent devouring every book he could get his hands on, including
Karl Marx’s Das Kapital. Che later revealed to his second wife
years later that at the time of reading Das Kapital he couldn’t
understand a thing. Of course this would all change.
After graduating from high school he began to study philosophy, both
inside and outside of college. He took engineering classes and enrolled
in medical school. He also became fascinated with psychology. It was
during this time that he began studying Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin.
Yet during this time and the year that followed he continued to avoid
any serious political participation. Paradoxically, however friends and
family remember that Che began to debate politics with different
organizations as well as with his family who were all very political, as
if he was beginning to put his reading to the test.(p. 50)
During one of these discussions Che made his first anti-imperialist
condemnation of the United $tates, accusing them of having imperial
designs in Korea.(p. 50) It was not until his trips up and down South
and Central America that Che Guevara would start to become radicalized.
And it wasn’t books that did it, but “the injustice of the lives of the
socially marginalized people he had befriended along his
journeys.”(p. 63) It was also during this time that Che’s criticism and
hatred for the United $tates began to grow, as now more than at any
prior time in his life he was convinced that it was Amerikan imperialism
that was the root cause of all of Latin@ America’s problems.(p. 63)
Through subsequent trips up and down the Americas Che met various
Marxist intellectuals he had a high opinion of because they were
“revolutionary.”(p. 118) In addition, he began to openly identify with a
political cause, aligning himself and working within the leftist
government of Arbenz in Guatemala. Also, very interesting to note that
during this time Che began an ambitious project to write what would have
been his first book titled The Role of the Doctor in Latin
America(p. 135), a project he would unfortunately never finish due
to his preoccupation with other revolutionary activities. A shame too as
the ideas outlined for his book apparently dealt with the role of
doctors during times of revolution, and one can’t help but draw
parallels with Frantz Fanon’s Wretched of the Earth written
after, but around the same period of revolutionary upsurge in the Third
World. Wretched not only deals with the anti-colonial struggle
in Africa, but the role of the revolutionary psychiatrist.
As part of his preparation for this book, Che found it necessary “to
take his knowledge of Marxism further, as he deepened his struggle of
Marx, Engels, Lenin and the Peruvian Jose Carlos Marategui”(p. 136)
founder of the Peruvian Communist Party which decades later would
develop the Maoist Sendero Luminoso (Shining Path). He also discovered
Mao Zedong and read about the Chinese communist revolution, ascertaining
that their road to socialism had been different than the Soviet
Union’s.(p. 136) Guevara’s resolve as a revolutionary would only become
steeled in the ensuing chaos that followed the CIA-backed coup against
the Arbenz government. This is also when the CIA first took notice of
Che starting “one of the thickest (files) in the CIA’s global
records.”(p. 159)
After Guatemala, Che fled to Mexico where his political destiny would
become sealed after meeting the leaders of the July 26th Movement after
their failed focoist attack on a Cuban military base. The leaders were
Fidel and Raul Castro. Soon thereafter, the trio, along with a band of
other Cuban exiles, left Mexico and began their historic guerrilla war
against the Batista dictatorship. Their point of unification was that
“Batista was little more than a pimp, selling off their country to
degenerate foreigners…”(p. 170) But physical training and marksmanship
wasn’t enough for Che in preparation to liberate Cuba. Confident that
the revolution would succeed, Che intensified “his study of economics,
he embarked on a cram course of books by Adam Smith, Keynes and other
economists, boned up on Mao and Soviet texts…”(p. 189) Once in the
Sierra Maestra Che kept up his studies as he wanted to have a firm grasp
of political and economic theory.(p. 189)
After exhibiting exemplary fighting and leadership skills Fidel made Che
his “chief of staff.” After the guerrilla victory, and among many other
accomplishments and activities, Che concentrated on consolidating the
initial revolutionary power base – the new Cuban military. Like Mao, Che
sought to “raise the cultural level of the army.” In addition to basic
literacy and education, the new military academy under Che was designed
to impart political awareness to the troops.(p. 384) He even helped
start Verde Olivio (Olive Green), a newspaper for the
revolutionary armed forces.(p. 385)
Che was also made President of Cuba’s National Bank. Indeed, Che Guevara
was fully immersed in trying to build up Cuba’s independent socialist
economy. He recognized that in order to completely liberate itself from
imperialist dependency, the Cuban economy would have to break free from
the sugar industry which subsumed Cuba, turning it into a one-crop
fiefdom. Cuba would also have to industrialize. Che was also for
agrarian reform believing that the peasants who worked the land should
have more control and reap more from it. Fidel had similar ideas on
agrarian reform but not as far reaching as Che’s. As a matter of fact, a
thorn of contention between Che and Fidel was Che’s strong belief that
in order to succeed as a free and independent socialist state, Cuba
would have to develop its own productive forces and should bow to no
one, while Fidel preferred to play various imperialist powers off of one
another in order to receive assistance in modernization and military
equipment. And while Che would ultimately, though not always, come to
echo Fidel’s line on modernization, this seemed to be more because of
Che’s position as a head of state and diplomat.
To Che’s credit however he was the principal architect in designing
Cuba’s economy and re-arranging the military prior to the Soviet Union’s
involvement on the island. Many just don’t realize how much influence
and power Che had in Cuba and that the creation of the many progressive
institutions in Cuba can be directly attributed to Che’s influence on
Fidel and Raul. And while Fidel would name Raul as his political
successor, it was Che that many noted as Fidel’s true right-hand man
despite his not even being a native Cuban.
One also gets the sense from reading this book that after the initial
seizure of power, and as the political situation worsened for Cuba on an
international level, Fidel trusted no one else in certain situations and
so he ceded many matters of domestic and foreign policy to Che who had a
better grasp of political economy, diplomacy and military affairs. This
was the period in which the USSR, which had already taken the capitalist
road, began to take notice of Che, not only because of his influence,
but because of his strong peasant leanings and independent initiative,
for which they would begin labeling him pejoratively as a “radical
Maoist.” Che denied being a Maoist, but actions speak louder than words.
According to this book Che made two major criticisms of the Chinese
Communist Party. The first was in accusing China of playing hardball
with their rice for sugar assistance, accusing China of trying to starve
Cuba. The second criticism was in berating China for not doing more to
aid the Vietnamese in their struggle against Amerikan imperialism.
Besides these criticisms it was very well known that Che had a high
degree of unity with China which he very much revered for having a
“higher socialist morality” than the Soviets, who he would increasingly
and with frequency severely criticize over the remainder of his life.
Among other things Che criticized the Communist Party of the Soviet
Union for their bourgeois lifestyles which he witnessed first hand. More
importantly, he later publicly condemned the Soviet Union for what he
deemed collusion against Cuba with the United $tates. Later Che would
hold up China’s socialist revolution “as an example that has revealed a
new road for the Americas.”(p. 490) Furthermore, after returning from
one of his trips to China, Che was “invigorated” with a new sense and
deepened understanding of socialism, replicating some of China’s
volunteer work brigades. He called these programs “emulacion comunista”
(communist emulation).(p. 503)
Nearing his departure from Cuba for the last time Che began two more
books which like Role of the Doctor he never finished:
Philosophical Notes and Economic Notes. The latter
being an extended critique of the Soviet Manual of Political
Economy. On the eve of his final trek into the Bolivian mountains
he sent an outline of the text to the budgetary finance system (BFS) for
review indicating that he was ready to put his anti-Soviet line on
political economy into practice (Guevara was the head of the BFS).
According to the author, what Che had in mind was “a new manual on
political economy better applied to modern times, for use by developing
nations and revolutionary societies in the Third World.”(p. 696)
Furthermore, according to Anderson who interviewed former members of the
BFS who read Che’s critique, Che wrote in the manual that the USSR and
the Eastern Bloc were doomed to return to capitalism if they didn’t
reform their economies.”(p. 697) Apparently these documents were left to
a comrade who never found the time to push for publication in the
increasingly social imperialist dominated Cuba. Today they remain in
Cuba locked away along with other of Che’s documents, which Fidel deemed
too sensitive to publish.(p. 697)
In the end and throughout his career it is very well known that Che was
a focoist and was killed because of his ultra-left and idealized version
of what a popular war looked like. Yet I was surprised to find out that
Che’s war strategy for Latin@ America was somewhat similar to Mao Zedong
and Lin Bao’s conception of global “Peoples War” for the Third World. As
Che pointed out in Guerrilla Warfare: A Method, the liberation
of the Americas from Amerikan hegemony could only come about through a
virtual united front of guerrilla and other peasant forces that would
use the Andean mountains which stretch from the top of South America to
the bottom as a series of revolutionary base areas which they would use
to attack the cities and urban zones of Latin@ American countries,
slowly but surely wresting control of one country after another until
all of Latin@ America was free. This is akin to the
village-encircle-city strategy of Lin and Mao.
The story of Che Guevara and his iconic image has not yet been forgotten
by revolutionaries today, as it continues to inspire us in our own
struggles. It is truly a pity that Che succumbed to his focoist beliefs.
His story should not only serve as an example as to the type of
revolutionaries we should aspire to become, but should also serve as an
example of what can happen if we pick up the gun too soon. Focoism has
taken away too many good comrades, and in Che Guevara it took away a
great comrade! Let it not take one more. So on this day the
forty-seventh anniversary of the death of Che Guevara, (9 October 2014)
and the day commemorating and honoring Che, “The Day of the Heroic
Guerrilla” (8 October 2014) let us raise the red banner of revolution
just as Che continuously raised it and died holding it. Let us raise the
red banner for the proletariat, for our lumpen and for our nations! Let
us be like Che! Seremos Como el Che!
La convicción de Mao que la cultura China era grande o quizá un logro
único e histórico fortaleció su sentimiento de orgullo nacional. En la
otra mano, su objetivo explícito era enriquecer el Marxismo con ideas y
mérito aspirados del pasado de la nación, y así rendirle como un agente
de transformación revolucionaria más potente, y finalmente
occidentalización, sin reemplazarlo con alguna forma de nuevo -
tradicionalismo con vestido Marxista.” - Stuart Schram
La sinifaccion del Marxismo es la adaptación y aplicación del Marxismo a
condiciones Chinas. Ese era el principio de la idea de Mao Zedong, y ese
fue el fundamento bajo cual Mao Zedong buscó no nada más liberar a China
de feudales, compradores, y el control imperialista, pero por el cual
avanzó al Marxismo-Leninismo al más avanzado tercer estado de ciencia
revolucionaria. Cuando Marxistas tradicionales no visualizaban potencial
revolucionario atravez de Europa y Amerika consideraban a Mao “Solo un
líder campesino con poco conocimiento del Marxismo,” lo que realmente
estaban expresando era su duda en la habilidad de la gente China en
hacer lucha de clase por que se suponía que estaban “alrevez” y por lo
tanto incivilizados, a pesar de que la sociedad China tiene miles de
años. Cuando el imperialismo Japonés llegó a China, la renombrado
Manchuria y la llamaron suya, Mao desafió y exitosamente aniquiló esa
demanda. Liberación nacional para la autodeterminación, era lo que Mao
percibía correctamente como su tarea hystorica para empujar a China
hacia delante en el esfuerzo Chino para la dignidad nacional.
Este fue el deber hystorico de Mao como revolucionario. ¿Cúal será el
nuestro? Para los nacionalistas - revolucionarios de la nación Chican@
es la adaptación y aplicación del Maoismo a las condiciones Chican@s.
“En esencia, sinifaccion involucraba para Mao tres dimensiones o
aspectos: comunicación, condiciones y cultura. El primero de estos es el
más claro y menos controversial. Al llamar a un nuevo y vital estilo y
modo Chino, placentero al ojo y oído de la gente común China, Mao tocaba
un punto valido pero previamente abandonado, que si el Marxismo es de
ser entendido y aceptado por otro pais que no sea Europeo debe de ser
presentado en lenguaje que se les haga inteligible y en términos
relevantes a sus propios problemas. Pero ¿Cómo, desde el punto de vista
de Mao, era la recepción del Marxismo en China determinado por la
mentalidad (o cultura) y la experiencia (o circunstancias concretas)?
Sobre todo, ¿Cómo iban los dos la cultura de la gente China, y las
condiciones en el que vivian, ser formadas por el nuevo poder
revolucionario puesto en 1949? … Mao busco definir y seguir un camino
Chino al socialismo. En seguir esta vision, él sin duda tomó el Marxismo
como su guía…. buscando inspiración al igual, así como abogó en 1938, de
las lecciones y valores de la historia China.”
La adaptación y aplicación del Maoísmo a condiciones Chican@s de esta y
por ninguna manera nos niega nuestra hystoria o realidad, al contrario
la afirma y demanda que se nos tome en cuenta. Mao dijo que el Marxismo
es una verdad en general con aplicación universal y la ciencia en
práctica que ahora se ha recapitulado en la historia lo ha comprovado en
verdad. Así que ahora que conocemos que el poder de la ciencia
revolucionaria el cual es Marxismo - Leninismo-Maoismo trabaja, la
pregunta se movió de ¿Qué forma de lucha toma la liberación nacional
Chican@? a ¿Cómo empezamos a implementarla? ¿Cómo nos adaptamos y
aplicamos el Maoísmo a las condiciones de la prisión? y luego ¿Cómo
aplicamos este entendimiento al barrio, Cómo una organización comunista
con vanguardia Chican@ se mira detrás de las paredes de la prisión?
¿Cómo sería en las calles?
Todas estas son preguntas que sólo se pueden preguntar y ser contestadas
por Chican@s en el proceso de la lucha.
La nación Chican@ esta actualmente en una junctura crítica de su
hystoria extensiva. Estamos empezando a alcanzar un punto en el que o
nos moldeamos con el resto de America Latina, dirigir nuestro esfuerzo
hacia la liberación nacional y nos paramos de hombro en hombro con el
Tercer Mundo, o vamos a desaparecer junto con el imperialismo. Como en
el pasado, hoy la decisión es nuestra. ûContinuaremos mandando a
nuestros hij@s a morir en el periferio por una bandera y tierra que no
es de ellos, o los prepararemos para pelear el imperialismo y liberar a
Aztlán? Tenemos el compulso revolucionario. Patria o muerte!