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.
Is it possible to defeat gangster mentality in ourselves? The short
answer is: Yes. There is plenty of solid individuals who have turned
their back on the thug life and criminal thinking. But, is that what is
needed when building a revolutionary cadre organization? Instead,
perhaps we should attempt to harness and direct our vision of
revolutionary social force into a hammer to first shatter the old
imperialist system. And then from the ashes and rubble shape a new and
better society that will serve the masses free of exploitation.
As members of the revolutionary cadre organization, each of us has to be
a leader, a teacher, an activist, a soldier and represent the future by
our conduct. Individual members must take the initiative to bring
together various organizations for a united front. For this to happen
our members have to think beyond their neighborhood, set or clique. All
of us are already soldiers of battles that take place right under the
nose of pigs. The system does not care if we kill each other. Actually
they encourage warfare between lumpen organizations. When we fight each
other we do their job for them.
Fight the imperialist system by making peace in prison and on the
street. Educate the young, think on an international level, and lead by
example. Evolve from a gangster into a hardcore communist revolutionary.
Consider your time fighting for your neighborhoods as basic training for
the real battle yet to come.
by a South Carolina prisoner August 2019 permalink
I want to touch base on the fellow Damu comrade April 2019
“Konfused
Gangster Mentality” in ULK 68.(1) I am in total agreement
with that author. We as Damus who are incarcerated as a whole are
oppressing ourselves, people, and nation. For two decades I’ve been a
Damu under the UBN and for the last 10 years the Damu nation has been
watered down. Askaris not fully overstanding the concept of our way of
life. There’s no way we override oppression and in the same sentence we
oppressing the oppressed.
Leaders of the Damu tribes are recruiting but not fully teaching. We
bang 5 watts and I see so many askaris falling prey to the trick tyrants
are creating. We as Damus must get organized and truly contribute to our
Uhuru by any means necessary. I agree with the askari “Damu on Damu is a
Double O Banga” not just beef within our nation but with others as well.
The United Front for Peace in Prisons is a structure for unity to stand
against imperialism. Damus aren’t oppressors, we are Black leaders,
therefore we must lead ourselves, people, and nation. To the many Damus
askaris in imperial-Amerikkka we must unite within our nation and come
together to assist with those who are making changes. Oppression works
by turning us against the oppressed, never against the oppressor. A
gangsta is one who uses his intelligence. Peace.
First we must begin with asking why do we have a gangster mentality? It
is because we know we are under attack, and the form of warfare is
oppression and prejudice. We act in a way of gangster mentality because
we know we must defend ourselves, and our minds from such attacks.
Therefore, we are defensive. That is where the mind frame stimulates
from.
We are active in battle on these streets because we are no fools, we
know survival is at stake. Although street and hoodlum affairs keep
every gangster blind to which war we should really be fighting; our
focus should not be going against a gangster’s mind, our focus should
remain on ending all attacks so that a gangster no longer has to pay any
mind.
The best way to begin re-defining toughness, is through understanding;
by first accepting every man for who he is, as he is. It isn’t the
gangster that needs to change, what needs to change are the threats
against us that have made us what we are.
MIM(Prisons) responds: This comrade raises a good point about the
system of oppression that breeds the gangster mentality. Understanding
where people’s mindset comes from is a good first step to changing that
mindset. And as this writer reminds us, we shouldn’t blame people for
the culture that created them. The next step is transforming this lumpen
outlook into a revolutionary outlook. And that’s the long-term struggle
that we’re taking on in prisons right now. Conscious comrades behind
bars can step up and build by educating others. We can focus on building
peace between lumpen organizations through the United Front for Peace in
Prisons. And through this peace we can turn our warfare on the real
enemy, the criminal injustice system.
I am personally connected to this topic, being an active high-ranking
individual of an organization. I have struggled trying to make the
transition to become a better man. 22 years young, growing up I was
never exposed to positive black New Afrikan role models, or anyone older
I could look up to who defined what it meant to be a man. Everyone I
hung around was in a 5 years span older or younger and everyone who was
successful was either an athlete, entertainer or criminal.
So when basketball or rapping didn’t work out I turned to the street
where toughness was defined by aggression and fearlessness. Fighting and
shooting. I turned to my organization for the loyalty and love and the
brotherhood. Being a gangster to me was being heartless to anybody who
was not with you, and if they cross you, deal with them like an enemy.
Being incarcerated I learned that leaders and high ranking members need
to revolutionize our organizations and get back to the original
principles that we were founded on. Having influence is great power, we
need to use this influence for education and fighting oppression. It is
easy to talk about, it’s a learning process. I can’t define toughness or
what it means to be a man, but I can explain personally why I am the way
I am and what it takes to prevent another from falling victim. Unity is
key. Changing your values so you cannot be controlled by privileges and
understanding if you are not part of the solution, then you contribute
to the problem. Most people care what people think so they let that stop
them from acting on what they really feel. But you can’t be for the
revolution in mind but not in action.
Education and unity! Use the “negative” organizations as a vehicle for
positive influence and change. It starts from the top O.G.s teach the
Y.G.s. Teach them how and they will fall in line.
Part 2: What is a man? What defines a gangster?
A lot of New Afrikan brothas like myself have no idea because no example
was taught by any positive New Afrikan role models. All we know is what
the white-washed media portrays to us. We listen to rap music that
glorifies violence and objectifies our women. Our role models being dope
dealers and our definition of gangster is Scarface, Larry Hoover, Pistol
Pete…
Being fearless and cold, making money by any means makes you a man, not
tolerating disrespect, toting guns and how many women you had sex with
all define your manhood. I sit here explaining that mentality and see
the flaws in it.
Now let’s talk about the cycle. Every parents’ purpose should be to make
the world a better place for the generation coming next. Speaking from
my mind, the older generation kills me complaining about the younger
generation and in order to solve a problem, first things first, you must
start at the root. I will not deflect or place blame but this older
generation, our own fathers, uncles, brothers start the cycle by failing
to educate and expose their children to something different, something
positive. They allow their children to be influenced by white imagery of
what a Black man is: violent, or supernaturally talented, only good for
white man’s entertainment.
I won’t sit here and talk about it with no solution, so how do we fix
it? Everything starts with the children and what we teach them and what
they are exposed to. New Afrikan men must learn the most important part
of parenting is presence. Just being available is so important for a
child growing up. We need to expose our children to successful business
leaders and entrepreneurs that look like us, not only athletes and movie
stars or entertainers. Teach them to be financially literate. Teach them
about this racist society and how to be prosperous in it. Only way to
break the mentality is to replace it. A man is responsible, reliable,
self-sufficient, wise, a man does not make mistakes. A man takes care of
his children and family. Now that’s Gangsta!
MIM(Prisons) responds: Everyone makes mistakes, and they are our
source of empirical knowledge. So we should not fear them. What we think
this comrade means here is that we should not keep making mistakes and
not learn. We shouldn’t live a lifetime of mistakes. If we listen to
what society tells young New Afrikan men, not living a lifetime of
mistakes means going against the grain.
Each One, Teach One! Whether a child or an adult. We all have things to
teach. And only by learning from each other does our collective
knowledge grow. While we can learn from our mistakes, most knowledge is
history. So we don’t need to make all the same mistakes the people of
the past did to learn the lesson ourselves, empirically. We can leap
frog ahead by building on the lessons from the past. It is this
collective, historical knowledge that gives humynity the power to reach
much greater heights.
Growth is key. We all go through many different stages of the learning
process at different times. As long as we are moving in the same general
direction, of liberation, then we can unite in our growth.
I strongly disagree with the exclusion of whites from the ranks of the
lumpen within the United $tates. (see the tenth paragraph of Wiawimawo’s
article
“Sakai’s
Investigation of the Lumpen in Revolution” in ULK 64)
Although most whites in the United $tates. enjoy “white privilege” there
are also whole communities of disenfranchised, impoverished whites.
These communities are heavily reliant on government support systems to
survive (i.e. food stamps, SSI, welfare, section 8 housing, etc.) They
are also rife with crime, drugs, and street gangs.
For example, take the lumpen organizations (L.O.s) from Chicago
(i.e. the Gaylords and the Simon City Royals). Both of these
organizations were started by disenfranchised, impoverished communities
consisting of mostly whites. They were originally founded to protect
their communities from outside forces.
By stating that only oppressed “minorities” can be considered lumpen,
Wiawimawo is engaging in paternalist politics that causes divisions
within the movement. The truth is that any people that fit the
political, social, and economic profile are lumpen. Disenfranchisement
is not unique, nor immune, to any nationality. In solidarity!
Wiawimawo of MIM(Prisons) responds: We are sending you a copy of
“Who is the Lumpen in the United $tates?” so you can better understand
our position on this question. First let’s look at the quote from my
article that you are responding to:
“This is why, in our work on the First World lumpen in the United
$tates, we excluded white people from the model by default. We did this
despite knowing many white lumpen individuals who are comrades and don’t
fit the model.”
Note i say that we know “many white lumpen individuals who are
comrades,” meaning we agree with you that there are white lumpen, we
just excluded them from the model presented in the paper cited. So why
did we do this? Well, it is mostly based in our assessment of the
principal contradiction in the United $tates being between the white
oppressor nation and the oppressed nations. In the paper we do write:
“White men [who are currently/formerly incarcerated lumpen] number about
1.3 million, but are much more likely to find employment and join the
labor aristocracy after release from prison. While in prison white men
do fall into the lumpen class but lack the oppressed nation outlook and
so often join white supremacist groups rather than supporting
revolutionary organizing. This is just one factor contributing to a
national outlook that leads us to exclude whites overall when discussing
the revolutionary potential of the First World lumpen.”
We also point out that historically the settler nation made up of
Europeans has always been a petty bourgeois nation, while the oppressed
nations have histories that are largely proletarian, but also
lumpen-proletarian. History affects our national and class
consciousness, so we can’t just look at a snapshot in time. But the
point of the paper was to show the size of the First World lumpen in the
oppressed nations of the United $tates and a snapshot of how their
conditions differ significantly from the white nation.
We’d say the examples you provide are exceptions that prove the rule. It
takes some digging to come up with them, but certainly they exist. And
in the context of the topic of this issue of Under Lock & Key
we can certainly agree with you that they should not be ignored.
Most often, in U.$. prisons, when we talk about white L.O.s we are
talking about white nationalist groups of some type. In our study, white
supremacist organizations that are promoting fascism in this country
today are made up of three main groups: former military, members of
lumpen organizations/prisoners, and alienated petty bourgeois youth
gathering around racist subcultures on the internet. The first two are
the more dangerous groups, though the third gives the movement more of a
feeling of a mass base of popularity. In our work it is with the second
group that we can have the most impact. And we’ve had a number of former
hardcore white supremacists become leaders within United Struggle from
Within, and many more have participated in progressive battles for
prisoner rights. It is in such alliances with the oppressed nations
around the common interests of the imprisoned lumpen that we can really
win over potential recruits who were initially drawn to fascism.
We welcome reports on examples of white lumpen organizing in the
interests of ending oppression, and further analysis of the white lumpen
as a base for progressive organizing.
Just writing in to say great job to everyone who participated with the
latest ULK
[ULK 64]. That
said, I also want to give my input on various articles that sparked my
interest:
In the second paragraph of this article, the author states that Sex
Offenders(S.O.s) constitute a more dangerous element than murderers
“because S.O.s often have more victims, and many of those victims become
sexual predators, creating one long line of victimization.”
As to your first point that S.O.s constitute a more dangerous element in
comparison to murderers, I think your reasoning here is purely
subjective as well as characteristic of the lumpen mindset both inside
and outside of prisons, which the criminal lumpen vies to minimize their
own parasitic and anti-people behavior. This way the lumpen can say “I
may be a thief, but at least I’m not a pedophile.” “I may be a gang
member, but at least I’m not a rapist, etc.” It is a notion that’s
caught up in all kinds of hypocritical bourgeois standards of honor,
integrity and other nonsense. It’s bourgeois moralization.
In the second paragraph the author states: “Contrarily, sexual
predators affect the entire societal composition. They perpetuate crimes
against the males and females, provoking deep burrowing psychological
problems and turn many victims into victimizers…The difference is not in
the severity of the anti-proletariat crime, but in the after effects.”
And murderers and other criminals don’t have the same or worse effects
on society? All victims of crime and violence will develop Post
Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) to varying degrees. The psychological
and emotional trauma that a victim of a robbery and the survivor of a
sexual assault suffer can be very similar. The same goes for the friends
and family of murder victims. And while it is true that some (I don’t
know about many) survivors of sexual abuse do turn into perpetrators of
those same crimes, the same can be said of victims and survivors of
other crimes, i.e. domestic violence, verbal abuse, and yes, murder!
Just look at the factors that go into perpetuating gang violence.
That said, there is one huge difference when it comes to murder, sexual
abuse, and their after effects. Whenever there is sexual abuse and
violence victims are able to move forward and heal from their physical,
emotional and psychological wounds if they receive the proper care and
attention. When someone is killed, however, there is no rectifying the
act. There is no coming back.
In the fifth paragraph you state: “…murder is more of a one-two
punch knock out, where sexual deprivation is twelve rounds of abuse…Most
murderers are not serial killers…”
According to Webster’s New World Dictionary, serial is defined as
“appearing in a series of continuous parts at regular intervals.” By
this definition, then, and in conjunction with your reasoning, many gang
members can be defined as serial killers.
In the eighth paragraph, you state that: “…rehabilitating sexual
predators can be made on an individual basis by revolutionaries who are
able to see past the label prejudice though their efforts, if conducted
scientifically, a systematic method can emerge for once the
revolutionary is successful…sex crimes will be a problem for capitalism,
socialism, or communism. Revolutionaries will have to address the
problem sooner or later.”
On this we agree, revolutionaries will have to address this problem
sooner or later so why not get past the idealist rhetoric, which you
inadvertently espouse, and begin dealing with it now by moving beyond
lumpen rationalizations on the matter. Comrades should learn to
understand that under the current power structure, all sex is rape and
that sex criminals cannot be rehabilitated only revolutionized. This
means that you cannot rehabilitate someone into a system that has gender
oppression and rape built right into it. Therefore, comrades should
learn all about gender oppression and the patriarchy and how the
patriarchy not only informs what gender oppression is, but defines it.
RE:
“Sakai
On Lumpen In Revolution”
I only wanted to comment that the ghettos and barrios are not only being
dispensed but shifted. The Antelope Valley, High Dessert and other
under-developed regions in Southern California are good examples of this
trend. Over the past 10-15 years, there has been a slow but steady
trickling out of Chican@s and New Afrikans from the wider Los Angeles
area and into places like Lancaster, Palmdale, Mojave, California City
due to gentrification.
Also, in relation to your article on Sakai’s book, what’s the status of
the MIM(Prisons) Lumpen Handbook?
In Struggle!
MIM(Prisons) responds: We published what was intended to be one
chapter of a book on the First World lumpen as
Who
is the Lumpen in the United $tates. Prior to that we put efforts
into the book
Chican@ Power
and the Struggle for Aztlán. Current research efforts are aimed at
summing up the final results of our updated survey on prison labor in
the United $tates. We will be publishing this final report along with a
larger collection of writings on the economics of prisons in the United
$tates. So that’s something to look out for in 2019.
The Lumpen Handbook was envisioned to address more topics related to
organizing the lumpen class in a revolutionary way in the United $tates
today. We have not had the capacity to carry out that project to the
scope originally envisioned, but this issue of
ULK (68) is an
example of our efforts to continue to tackle that topic.
We also have notes to develop into a Selected Works of the Maoist
Internationalist Movement (1983-2008) book; another project we would
like to see to fruition if we can garner more support for our existing
work in the coming years.
“Sakai
on Lumpen in Revolution” was my favorite piece in ULK 64. I
would have liked to see a more in-depth analysis of the subject of the
role of lumpen following the review of Sakai’s book. I believe the
lumpen will play a principal role in revolution here in imperialist
United States.
We live in a time very different from Marx’s, when the battle was to be
waged between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. Marx wrote of the
growing contradictions between bourgeoisie and proletariat, following
from these contradictions, the proletariat revolution abolishing
capitalism. This was apparently true then, but the terrain is very
different now. After the imperialist wars I and II led to imperialist
expansion and consolidation of global capitalism and the global market,
new classes with their own contradictions (and inner-contradictions)
have been created. And with the transformation of colonialism proper
into neocolonialism, the roles of the different classes and the
contradictions even among the oppressed classes themselves, has created
many non-principal contradictions, clouding the principal ones.
In the imperialist countries, and especially here in the imperialist
capital of the world, the U.S., imperialism and neo-colonialism is
beneficial to the “proletariat.” The working class population is
effectively bought off with a better standard of living thanks to global
value transfer from Third World nations. This “sharing of the (stolen)
pie” gives the appearance that the proletariat and the bourgeoisie share
a common interest in imperialism. Of course, the contradiction between
the two classes continues to exist, but giving the proletariat some
crumbs off of the table of the “all you can eat global buffet”
alleviates the contradictions and pacifies revolutionary potential and
the raising of working class consciousness.
With the proletariat in the imperialist countries there also exists
blind patriotism and national chauvinism, and this is a major hindrance
to uniting the proletariat in any truly revolutionary way. Much of the
working class has been brainwashed with national pride without any good
reason. Participating in bourgeois political games, buying into their
effectiveness. Supporting various U.S. aggression toward Third World
countries, and the so-called “war on terror.”
These are just a few of the reasons why we should consider the
possibility of the lumpen playing a principal role in revolution.
Lumpen’s very existence is much more precarious and unpredictable. They
comprise
millions
of the U.S. population. They are the most cast-off population.
People are accepting gays, lesbians, transgenders, etc. The women’s
movement is again taking off and enjoying widespread support. Racism
continues to be addressed and shunned, as well as religious intolerance.
But the lumpen population continues to be cast off, ignored,
discriminated against for life, killed, and legally enslaved (see the
13th amendment of the U.S. Constitution).
Proletariats, with the sheer numbers, and the fact that they are the
very foundation, the absolute precondition for the existence of
capitalism, they hold the potential to abolish oppression. But for that
to happen, the proletariat here would have to settle accounts with
imperialism, and this may prove more difficult than transforming the
lumpen mentality to a revolutionary mentality.
Lumpen have been in rebellion their entire lives against the exploitive
system, even if unconsciously. The prestige of U.S. righteousness,
justice, and equality, if it ever existed for the lumpen, is constantly
being deconstructed. And the lumpen, with their lumpen organizations,
are these not already guerrilla armies? Doing guerrilla warfare every
day? We need only work to introduce revolutionary principles and raise
their consciousness. Their material conditions of existence are more
primed for revolutionary action than the proletariat in the U.S. today.
I would really like to see more dialogue on this subject. I hope that I
have made some kind of valid point. I am no authority on revolutionary
theory. I am only 24 and very new.
MIM(Prisons) responds: We have much unity with this analysis of
classes in the United $tates. But where it is limited to an analysis of
classes within U.$. borders, we think it’s crucial to think more broadly
about classes globally in this era of imperialism. As this comrade
notes, the workers in the United $tates have been bought off with the
spoils of imperialism. But this doesn’t mean the proletariat on a global
scale is bought off. We do look to the proletariat as the foundational
class for revolution, but we don’t find that proletariat within U.$.
borders. Instead we find it in the Third World, where it is actively
engaged in a battle for life and death with imperialism. There it is not
a big leap for the proletariat to take up revolutionary struggle.
In First World countries like the United $tates, on the other hand, we
see the lumpen playing a leading role in the revolutionary movement.
This is in large part because the national contradiction is the
principal contradiction within U.$. borders. And as this writer points
out, the oppressed nation lumpen continue to receive the brunt of this
oppression even while living in a country of great wealth and
prosperity. The potential for lumpen organizations to become
revolutionary organizations is of great interest to us as well. We work
with many of these organizations to build peace and unity. But these
organizations are generally structured to meet capitalist goals. In the
book reviewed, Sakai, addresses the challenges faced in joining forces
militarily with such organizations in other times and places. But in
those contexts we are talking about a lumpen-proletariat, in proletarian
populations. We talk about the First World lumpen, within the exploiter
countries, and see even more barriers in wholesale moves to the
revolutionary road.
With such a relatively small potentially revolutionary population in the
imperialist countries, we don’t expect to see revolution start from
within the United $tates. At least not without a significant change in
conditions. The most likely avenue for revolution comes from the Third
World. This doesn’t absolve us of responsibility within imperialist
countries. We must organize the resistance, support revolutionary
movements in the Third World, and build a movement capable of seizing
the moment when it arrives.
The Dangerous Class and Revolutionary Theory J. Sakai
Kersplebedeb Publishing, 2017 Available for $24.95 (USD) +
shipping/handling from: kersplebedeb
CP 63560, CCCP Van Horne Montreal, Quebec Canada H3W 3H8
The bulk of this double book is looking at the limited and contradictory
writings of Marx/Engels and Mao on the subject of the lumpen with
greater historical context. MIM(Prisons) and others have analyzed their
scattered quotes on the subject.(1) But Sakai’s effort here is focused
on background research to understand what Marx, Engels and Mao were
seeing and why they were saying what they were saying. In doing so,
Sakai provides great practical insight into a topic that is central to
our work; the full complexities of which have only begun to unfold.
Size and Significance
In the opening of the “Dangerous Class”, Sakai states that
“lumpen/proletarians are constantly being made in larger and larger
numbers”.(p.3) This follows a discussion of criminalized zones like the
ghetto, rez or favela. This is a curious conclusion, as the ghettos and
barrios of the United $tates are largely being dispersed rather than
expanding. Certainly the rez is not expanding. Sakai does not provide
numbers to substantiate these “larger and larger” lumpen populations
today.
In our paper,
Who
is the Lumpen in the United $tates? we do run some census numbers
that indicate an increase in the U.$. lumpen population from 1.5% of the
total population in 1960 to over 10% in 2010. However, other methods led
us to about 4% of the U.$. population today if you only look at
oppressed nation lumpen, and 6 or 7% if you include whites.(1) This
latter number is interestingly similar to what Marx estimated for
revolutionary France (around 1850)(p.66), what Sakai estimates for
Britain around 1800(p.112), and what Mao estimated for pre-revolutionary
China.(p.119) Is 6% the magic number that indicates capitalism in
crisis? The historical numbers for the United $tates (and elsewhere) are
worthy of further investigation.
In this graph we see the biggest changes being the increase in the
lumpen (from 1.5% in 1960 to 10.6% in 2010) and the decrease in the
housewives category. While this is completely feasible, the direct
relationship between these two groups in the way we did the calculation
leaves us cautious in making any conclusions from this method alone.(1)
1800 London
lumpen (Sakai)
lumpen + destitute semi-proletariat (Colquhoun)
source
6%
16%
(pp.111-112)
1850s France (Marx)
lumpen
lumpen + destitute semi-proletariat
source
6%
13%
(p.66)
2010 United $tates (MIM(Prisons))
First Nations lumpen
New Afrikan lumpen
Raza lumpen
Raza lumpen + semi-proletariat
source
30%
20%
5%
15%
(1)
Alliances and Line
Certainly, at 6% or more, the lumpen is a significant force, but a force
for what? In asking that question, we must frame the discussion with a
Marxist analysis of capitalism as a contradiction between bourgeoisie
and proletariat. There’s really just two sides here. So the question is
which side do the lumpen fall on. The answer is: It depends.
One inspiring thing we learn in this book is that the lumpen made up the
majority of the guerrillas led by Mao’s Chinese Communist Party at
various times before liberation.(p.122) This shows us that the lumpen
are potentially an important revolutionary force. However, that road was
not smooth. On the contrary it was quite bloody, involving temporary
alliances, sabotage and purges.(pp.201-210)
Sakai’s first book spends more time on the French revolution and the
obvious role the lumpen played on the side of repression. Marx’s
writings on these events at times treated the Bonaparte state as a
lumpen state, independent of the capitalist class. This actually echoes
some of Sakai’s writing on fascism and the role of the declassed. But as
Sakai recognizes in this book, there was nothing about the Bonaparte
government that was anti-capitalist, even if it challenged the existing
capitalist class. In other words, the mobilized lumpen, have played a
deciding role in revolutionary times, but that role is either led by
bourgeois or proletarian ideology. And the outcome will be capitalism or
socialism.
Defining the Lumpen, Again
Interestingly, Sakai does not address the First World class structure
and how that impacts the lumpen in those countries. Our paper, Who is
the Lumpen in the United $tates? explicitly addresses this question
of the First World lumpen as distinct from the lumpen-proletariat. While
MIM changed its line from the 1980s when it talked about significant
proletariats within the internal semi-colonies of the United $tates,
this author has not seen Sakai change eir line on this, which might
explain eir discussion of a lumpen-proletariat here. Sakai’s line
becomes most problematic in eir grouping of imperialist-country
mercenaries in the “lumpen”. Ey curiously switches from
“lumpen/proletariat” when discussing China, to “lumpen” when discussing
imperialist-country mercenaries, but never draws a line saying these are
very different things. In discussions with the editor, Sakai says the
stick up kid and the cop aren’t the same kind of lumpen.(p.132) Sure, we
understand the analogy that cops are the biggest gang on the streets.
But state employees making 5 or 6-digit incomes with full bennies do not
fit our definition of lumpen being excluded from the capitalist economy,
forced to find its own ways of skimming resources from that economy. The
contradiction the state faces in funding its cops and soldiers to
repress growing resistance is different from the contradiction it faces
with the lumpen on the street threatening to undermine the state’s
authority.
Sakai dismisses the idea that the line demarking lumpen is the line of
illegal vs. legal. In fact, the more established and lucrative the
illegal operation of a lumpen org is, the more likely it is to be a
partner with the imperialist state. That just makes sense.
The inclusion of cops and mercenaries in the lumpen fits with Sakai’s
approach to the lumpen as a catchall non-class. We do agree that the
lumpen is a much more diverse class, lacking the common life experience
and relationship to the world that the proletariat can unite around. But
what’s the use of talking about a group of people that includes Amerikan
cops and Filipino garbage pickers? Our definitions must guide us towards
models that reflect reality close enough that, when we act on the
understanding the model gives us, things work out as the model predicts
more often than not. Or more often than any other models. This is why,
in our work on the First World lumpen in the United $tates, we excluded
white people from the model by default. We did this despite knowing many
white lumpen individuals who are comrades and don’t fit the model.
How about L.O.s in the U.$.?
The analysis of the First World lumpen in this collection is a reprint
of Sakai’s 1976 essay on the Blackstone Rangers in Chicago. Sakai had
referred to L.O.s becoming fascist organizations in New Afrikan
communities in a previous work, and this seems to be eir basis for this
claim.
While the essay condemns the Blackstone Rangers for being pliant tools
of the Amerikan state, Sakai does differentiate the young foot soldiers
(the majority of the org) from the Main 21 leadership. In fact, the only
difference between the recruiting base for the Rangers and the Black
Panthers seems to have been that the Rangers were focused on men.
Anyway, what Sakai’s case study demonstrates is the ability for the
state to use lumpen gangs for its own ends by buying off the leadership.
There is no reason to believe that if Jeff Fort had seen eye-to-eye with
the Black Panthers politically that the youth who followed him would not
have followed him down that road.
Essentially, what we can take from all this is that the lumpen is a
wavering class. Meaning that we must understand the conditions of a
given time and place to better understand their role. And as Sakai
implies, they have the potential to play a much more devastating and
reactionary role when conditions really start to deteriorate in the
heart of the empire.
Relating this to our practice, Sakai discusses the need for
revolutionaries to move in the realm of the illegal underground. This
doesn’t mean the underground economy is a location for great proletarian
struggle. It can contain some of the most egregious dehumanizing aspects
of the capitalist system. But it also serves as a crack in that very
system.
As comrades pointed out in
our
survey of drug use and trade in U.$. prisons, the presence of drugs
is accompanied by an absence of unity and struggle among the oppressed
masses. Meanwhile effective organizing against drug use is greatly
hampered by threats of violence from the money interests of lumpen
organizations and state employees.(2) The drug trade brings out the
individualist/parasitic tendencies of the lumpen. Our aim is to counter
that with the collective self-interest of the lumpen. It is that
self-interest that pushes oppressed nation youth to “gang up” in the
first place, in a system that is stacked against them.
The revolutionary/anti-imperialist movement must be active and
aggressive in allying with the First World lumpen today. We must be
among the lumpen masses so that as contradictions heighten, oppressed
nation youth have already been exposed to the benefits of collective
organizing for self-determination. The national contradiction in
occupied Turtle Island remains strong, and we are confident that the
lumpen masses will choose a developed revolutionary movement over the
reactionary state. Some of the bourgeois elements among the lumpen
organizations will side with the oppressor, and with their backing can
play a dominant role for some times and places. We must be a counter to
this.
While Mao faced much different conditions than we face in the United
$tates today, the story of alliances and betrayals during the Chinese
revolution that Sakai weaves is probably a useful guide to what we might
expect. Ey spends one chapter analyzing the Futian Incident,
where “over 90 percent of the cadres in the southwestern Jiangxi area
were killed, detained, or stopped work.”(p.205) The whole 20th Army,
which had evolved from the lumpen gang, Three Dots Society, was
liquidated in this incident. It marked a turning point and led to a
shift in the approach to the lumpen in the guerilla areas. While in
earlier years, looting of the wealthy was more accepted within the ranks
of guerrilla units, the focus on changing class attitudes became much
greater.(p.208) This reflected the shift in the balance of forces; the
development of contradictions.
Sakai concludes that the mass inclusion of lumpen forces in the
guerrilla wars by the military leaders Mao Zedong and Chu Teh was a
strategic success. That the lumpen played a decisive role, not just in
battle, but in transforming themselves and society. We might view the
Futian Incident, and other lesser internal struggles resulting
in death penalties meted out, as inevitable growing pains of this
lumpen/peasant guerilla war. Mao liked to quote Prussian general Carl
von Clausewitz, in saying that war is different from all other humyn
activity.
For now we are in a pre-war period in the United $tates, where the
contradictions between the oppressed and oppressors are mostly fought
out in the legal realms of public opinion battles, mass organizing and
building institutions of the oppressed. Through these activities we
demonstrate another way; an alternative to trying to get rich,
disregarding others’ lives, senseless violence, short-term highs and
addiction. We demonstrate the power of the collective and the need for
self-determination of all oppressed peoples. And we look to the First
World lumpen to play a major role in this transformation of ourselves
and society.
We take action regardless of whether we will ultimately win or lose. We
take action simply because it is in our nature to resist injustice and
oppression. It is who we are. And we recognize that not everyone has
that same nature. We should not criticize or look down on those who
don’t have enough strength for this fight against the odds. After all,
oppression of the weak and unfortunate is the very thing we are
struggling against. So we hold no animosity towards the naysayers as
long as they do not directly interfere with our cause, and we are happy
when our actions benefit them even though they refused to participate.
People cannot help being the way they are. For those of us with the
revolutionary spirit the struggle comes as naturally as apathy and
passivity comes to those who refuse to participate.
But the truth is that we most definitely can make a difference. The
government and the TDCJ administration would like us to believe they are
all-powerful and can do whatever they want without concern for any
consequences, but that is just propaganda intended to make us give up
before we even start. We know this from experience because we have won
victories already. We have seen even just a handful of prisoners come
together many times and force the administration to improve conditions
or follow its own rules.
We know that just because our actions are ignored at first or because we
got a rubber stamp response on a grievance doesn’t mean it didn’t have
an effect. Everything has an effect and it all adds up. We recognize
that change in any area of life generally requires sustained action over
a long period of time. The pigs’ first line of defense is to keep us
ignorant and keep us discouraged, but we must know better than to fall
into those traps.
What we often see is prisoners coming together in a spontaneous uprising
when abuses reach a crisis point. The administration will quickly back
down and meet their demands. But then when this temporary mobilization
of the mass of prisoners falls apart, the administration incrementally
begins the same abuses all over again. If they overstep and the
prisoners mobilize themselves once more, then the administration just
repeats the process of backing down and incrementally reimposing the
same abuses. In this way they gradually accustom the prisoners to accept
the abuse of their rights and human dignity.
So another reason why we take action is simply to stay mobilized and
able to resist the incremental erosion of our rights. We don’t fool
ourselves about the possibility of keeping the whole mass of prisoners
fully mobilized. The majority will always care more about watching TV
and playing fantasy football. But there are also at least a few
prisoners who see revolutionary work as a way to pass the time that is
just as enjoyable and interesting, with the added benefit that it
actually gives them some real power over their circumstances. If we can
keep this core of dedicated revolutionaries organized and active at all
times, then we can put up constant resistance to the erosion of our
rights. And we will have an organizational framework and leadership
already in place that allows us to quickly mobilize the masses for some
larger project whenever it becomes necessary.
We know all this is an uphill battle, but we can take heart when we
study the past. In the broad sweep of history the course of events has
overwhelmingly been in our favor. The oppressors of the world have been
fighting a desperate retreat for the last thousand years, losing battle
after battle in the struggle for human rights. It is clear which way the
wind is blowing. And the struggle for prisoners’ rights fits squarely
within that larger struggle.
There will be a day in the not-so-distant future when people look back
with horror and shame at our current culture of mass incarceration and
the conditions in these prisons. And those who struggled for prisoners’
rights and reform of the criminal justice system will be grouped among
the heroes who fought to overcome absolutist monarchies, colonialism,
slavery, worker exploitation, racism, sexism, and every other form of
oppression. We can take action with absolute confidence that we are on
the right side of history. In the long run, we are assured of victory.
MIM(Prisons) responds: So much of what this author writes here
speaks directly to the value of perseverance in our work. The project of
building revolution (or making any great impact on the world) is made up
of many, many, many days of mundane tasks. Some days of excitement. And
many more days of mundane commitment.
In a debate on whether people are born as, or developed into,
revolutionaries, it seems like this author would argue the former. But
surely everyone who’s turned on to politics can also remember a time in
their life when they were apathetic and passive. Whether from an
incorrect understanding of how the world works, or a lack of faith in
our own ability to change and make change. At some time, probably over a
long time, we decided to stand up.
Well, how do people turn from only participating when there’s an acute
problem, to making that long-term commitment to building a revolution?
(Hint: it’s not a persynality trait we’re born with.)
Author and bourgeois psychologist Angela Duckworth says developing
interest and passion for your work (the type of passion that sticks it
out through the hard times) is made of “a little bit of discovery,
followed by a lot of development, and then a lifetime of deepening.”(1)
In the quote below Duckworth talks about “having fun” as part of
developing interest. While prisons certainly aren’t fun, we can apply
this concept to prisoners facing repression, where the “trigger” for
interest is repeated exposure to examples and experiences of resistance.
“Before hard work comes play. Before those who’ve yet to fix on a
passion are ready to spend hours a day diligently honing skills, they
must goof around, triggering and retriggering interest. Of course,
developing an interest requires time and energy, and yes, some
discipline and sacrifice. But at this earliest stage, novices aren’t
obsessed with getting better. They’re not thinking years and years into
the future. They don’t know what their top-level, life-orienting goal
will be. More than anything else, they’re having fun.”
“… [I]nterests are not discovered through introspection. Instead,
interests are triggered by interactions with the outside world. The
process of interest discovery can be messy, serendipitous, and
inefficient. This is because you can’t really predict with certainty
what will capture your attention and what won’t. You can’t simply will
yourself to like things, either. …”
“… [W]hat follows the initial discovery of an interest is a much
lengthier and increasingly proactive period of interest development.
Crucially, the initial triggering of a new interest must be followed by
subsequent encounters that retrigger your attention – again and again
and again.”
Just because someone is initially uninterested in the politics behind
the mass action, through repeated exposure and “retriggering interest,”
we can encourage them to go deeper. And after the initial interest is
sparked, Duckworth says deliberate practice, a sense of purpose, and a
hopeful attitude, are what enable us to commit and excel. These
approaches are what cause us to overcome the adversity that the author
describes in the article above, of administrative failures,
discouragement from staff, and even our own mistakes.
And Duckworh argues, based on eir decades of study, that these qualities
can be nurtured and developed – by individuals themselves, and by people
outside of those individuals. As organizers, we need to work to develop
interest, practice, purpose, and hope in others. In eir book
Grit, Duckworth lays out many methods to do this, some of which
we’ve touched on in other articles throughout this issue of ULK.
With this response, we primarily want to highlight that a revolutionary
fighting spirit is something that we can cultivate; just because someone
doesn’t have it now doesn’t mean they won’t ever have it. And it’s the
organizer’s job to make that process as successful as possible.
While many euro-Amerikans languish and suffer in U.$. prisons, it is
those whose land the Amerikans seized and occupy, and those the
Amerikans enslaved and exploited, who disproportionately rot here. The
First World lumpen are an excess population, that imperialism has
limited use for.
One solution to this problem has been using the lumpen to distribute
and consume narcotics.
Narcotics,
and the drug game itself pacify the lowest classes of the internal
semi-colonies, by providing income and distracting drama, while
circulating capital.(1) Of course, rich Amerikans play a much larger
role in propping up drug sales.
Another solution to the excess population has been mass incarceration.
Prisons serve as a tool of social control; a place to put the rebellious
populations that once spawned organizations like the Black Panther Party
and Young Lords Party. Meanwhile,
imprisonment
serves to drain the resources of the internal semi-colonies in
numerous ways.(2) This reinforces their colonial states in relation to
the Amerikan empire. As an institution, mass incarceration serves as an
outlet at home for the racist ideology that imperialism requires from
its populace for operations abroad. The criminal injustice system
sanitizes national oppression under the banner of “law and order,”
reducing the more open manifestations of the national contradiction
within the metropole that brought about the recognition of the need for
national liberation in the 1960s and 1970s.(3)
The following are excerpts from a Minnesota comrade’s response to
“MIM(Prisons)
on U.$. Prison Economy”, originally published in
ULK 8
currently available in the “13th Amendment Study Pack”(updated
8/10/2017).
“In as much as I agree with MIM’s positions in this study pack, I find
it beyond the pale of relevance in arguing over whether the conditions
We now exist under are in fact slavery or exploitation or rather
oppression that revolves around laws devised to ensure that the first
class’s social, political and economic control is maintained. Mass
incarceration might be all of those above or none at all, to those of Us
in the struggle. What we all can agree on is that mass incarceration is
a machine being used to exterminate, as the imperialists see us, the
undesirable sub-underclass.
“…Prisons are being used to remove black and brown males at their prime
ages of producing children, going to college, and gaining meaningful
vocational training. This loss of virulent males in Our communities does
more than weaken them. It removes from the female an eligible male and
acts no different than sterilization. Instead of incinerators or gas
chambers, We are being nurtured, domesticated, doped, and fed
carcinogens. Moreover, prisons have provided us with disease-ridden
environments, and poor diets, minimum ambulatory exercise, poor air and
water. Lastly, the removal of cognitive social stimuli necessary for the
maturation of social skills has created an underdeveloped antisocial
human being lacking in compassion and individuality.
“…the reason that the slavery or exploitation argument doesn’t resonate
for those of Us who are on the front line, I think, is because it’s
muted by the point that incarceration is an institution created by the
oppressor. It will have vestiges of slavery, exploitation, and social
control within it. To what degree? is arguable.”
So far we have no disagreements with this comrade. And while we have
long upheld this point to be important for our understanding of mass
incarceration in the United $tates and how to fight it, we do recognize
that the slavery analogy will resonate with the masses on an emotional
level. The comrade later goes on to reinforce our position:
“Eradication is where slavery and mass incarceration split. Although
slaves were punished and victims of social control, they had value and
were not eradicated.”
A crass example of this was exposed last month when Kern County pigs
turned on one of their own and released a video of Chief Pig Donny
Youngblood stating that it’s cheaper to kill someone being held by the
state than to wound them. These are state bureaucracies, with pressure
to cut budgets. While keeping prison beds full is in the interest of the
unions, it is not in the immediate financial interest to the state
overall.
Whereas we agree with this comrade when ey discusses the role of convict
leasing in funding southern economies shortly after the creation of the
13th Amendment, we disagree with the analogy to funding rural white
communities today.
“The slave, instead of producing crops and performing other trades on
the plantation is now a source of work… So to insist states aren’t
benefactors of mass incarceration is incredulous. Labor aristocrats and
the imperialist first class, who are majority Caucasian males, have
disproportionately benefited.”
The difference is a key point in Marxism, and understanding the
imperialist economy today. That the existence of millions of prisoners
in the United $tates creates jobs for labor aristocrats is very
different from being a slave, whose labor is exploited. And the
difference is that the wealth to pay the white (or otherwise) prison
staff is coming from the exploitation of the Third World proletariat.
And the economy around incarceration is just one way that the state
moves those superprofits around and into the pockets of the everyday
Amerikan. The “prisoner-as-slave” narrative risks erasing the important
role of this imperialist exploitation.
Another reason why we must be precise in our explanation is the history
of white labor unions in this country in undermining the liberation
struggles of the internal semi-colonies. Hitching the struggle of
prisoners to that of the Amerikan labor movement is not a way to boost
the cause. It is a way to subordinate it to an enemy cause – that of
Amerikan labor.
There is a cabal of Amerikan labor organizers on the outside that are
pushing their agenda to the forefront of the prison movement. Their
involvement in this issue goes back well over a century and their
position has not changed. It is a battle between the Amerikan labor
aristocracy and the Amerikan bourgeoisie over super-profits extracted
from the Third World. In this case the labor aristocracy sees that
prisoners working for little to no wages could cut into the jobs
available to their class that offer the benefit of surplus value
extraction from other nations. Generally the labor aristocracy position
has won out, keeping the opportunities for real profiteering from prison
labor very limited in this country. But that is not to say that
exploitation of prison labor could not arise, particularly in a severe
economic crisis as Third World countries delink from the empire forcing
it to look inward to keep profits cycling.
While our previous attempt to tackle this subject may have come across
as academic Marxist analysis, we hope to do better moving forward to
push the line that the prison movement needs to be tied to the
anti-colonial, national liberation struggles both inside and outside the
United $tates. And that these struggles aim to liberate whole nations
from the United $tates, and ultimately put an end to Amerikanism.
Selling those struggles out to the interests of the Amerikan labor
movement will not serve the interests of the First World lumpen.