MIM(Prisons) is a cell of revolutionaries serving the oppressed masses inside U.$. prisons, guided by the communist ideology of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.
Under Lock & Key is a news service written by and for prisoners with a focus on what is going on behind bars throughout the United States. Under Lock & Key is available to U.S. prisoners for free through MIM(Prisons)'s Free Political Literature to Prisoners Program, by writing:
MIM(Prisons) PO Box 40799 San Francisco, CA 94140.
People of Savar come together around collapsed factory to join rescue
effort and find loved ones.
The recent events around the bombings in Boston has been confusing to
internationalists. Last week, we mourned the 3 unnecessary deaths and
over 200 injuries that occurred in Boston on 15 April 2013. Today we
mourn the over 250 unnecessary deaths (and counting) and over 800 more
who remain trapped in the rubble in Bangladesh [10 May 2013 update: the
death toll has passed 1000]. Yet we are confused, though not surprised,
by expressions of sadness that are so disproportionate among Amerikans
surrounding these two events. Both were unnecessary results of
imperialism. Reports today from one of the bombers in Boston state that
he was motivated by the U.$. invasions and occupations in Iraq and
Afghanistan – both imperialist occupations for Third World resources.
The deaths in Bangladesh came after a garment manufacturer, who produces
goods for the U.$. market, threatened employees with starvation to get
them to work in an unsafe building, which then collapsed while they were
inside.
People die in bombings everyday in places like Iraq and Afghanistan
where there has been heavy U.$. military involvement, and yet we don’t
see Amerikans respond like they have over the last week. Those who got
teary-eyed over the deaths in Boston, while barely registering those in
Bangladesh as a blip at the bottom of their TV screen, are emblematic of
the problem of national chauvinism in the United $tates. In place of
this view we promote a view of collective responsibility. Humyn society
is a product of humyn actions that we, as a collective species,
determine. For those of us who are citizens of the most powerful country
on Earth, our responsibility is that much more grave.
So, the Amerikan reader might ask, should we bow to the demands of
anyone who plants a homemade bomb in a crowd? Of course not. What we are
saying is that if Amerikans paid as much attention to deaths caused by
their nation as they did to deaths inflicted on their nation, then the
latter would be less frequent. Of course the latter already pales in
comparison to the former, as Amerikans kill far more people of other
nations than vice-versa. Taking responsibility for this fact and acting
to change it is the single most practical thing one can do to prevent
unnecessary deaths of all peoples. Most of the “response” to the bombing
in Boston has been political posturing and emotional subjectivism – all
show, no substance. For the people of the world who face death on a
daily basis, such platitudes are not enough and only real solutions earn
respect, not empty words.
A peaceful world is possible. But a peaceful world is precluded by one
without exploitation. You cannot maintain wealth inequality and profit
motives without the use of force. MIM(Prisons) stands for an end of such
use of force, an end to all oppression and exploitation, and an end to
the unnecessary deaths that are the result of the system of imperialism
in so many forms. We challenge U.$. citizens to join us in taking
collective responsibility for the actions of our government and the
deaths and destruction that result from it. Taking responsibility means
taking action to change those things, while combating the culture of
chauvinism that dominates our society.
The Maoist Internationalist Ministry of Prisons (MIM(Prisons)), a
communist organization in the United $tates which formed out of the
legacy of the Maoist Internationalist Movement (MIM), announces support
for and echoes the urgency of the main ideas in the below statement from
the Revolutionary Anti-Imperialist Movement (RAIM). In particular, we
recognize the importance of fighting First Worldism, which incorrectly
identifies the petty bourgeoisie of the imperialist countries as a part
of the international proletariat. First Worldism has played an important
role in undermining the building of socialism worldwide. A correct class
analysis is critical to all successful revolutionary movements.
MIM(Prisons) refrains from being an outright signatory of this statement
because of what it leaves out. In this dialogue within the International
Communist Movement (ICM), we would add that we do not see the legacy of
the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM) as a positive one. As
the original MIM pointed out over the many years since the formation of
the
RIM,
it was always a force for revisionism rather than a force for
revolution. Revolutionary parties seeking to re-establish the RIM
should take heed of the mistakes that were inherent in the RIM design
and political line from the start. There is no value in resurrecting a
revisionist organization.
Further, we challenge our comrades in Maoist organizations around the
world to examine closely what
Mao
wrote back in 1943 on the question of dissolving the International.
We do not believe that conditions have changed since that time so that a
new International will be a positive development. Instead we uphold the
original MIM position that “The world’s communist parties should compare
notes and sign joint declarations, but there are no situations where a
party should submit to international discipline through a world party.
Where various Maoist parties from different nationalities have the same
goal, they will then coordinate their actions in joint struggle. This
will occur in the case of the united states when several nationalities
come to exert joint dictatorship over it. Of course there will be some
form of temporary organizational discipline at international
conferences, but such discipline should not extend to what gets done in
the various countries by the various Maoist
parties.”(“Resolutions
on Vanguard Organizing.” 1995 MIM Congress.)
From the Revolutionary Anti-Imperialist Movement [This letter
has been co-signed by the Turkish group, İştirakî, and the
pan-Indigenous web-project, Onkwehón:we Rising. To co-sign this
important international document, email raim-d@hush.com]
A Letter to Maoist and Revolutionary Organizations
Recently the Communist Party of Italy (Maoist) called for the convening
of an international meeting of Maoist organizations. This call comes
some years after the RIM collapsed following the development of evident
revisionism within two of its leading organizations, the RCP-USA and the
UCPN.
Comrades! Let us carry out and celebrate the firm break with the
revisionism emanating from the leadership of the RCP-USA and the UCPN.
In doing so, let us reaffirm our defining points of unity based on the
experience of class struggle and distilled into Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.
These include:
All of history is the result of the development of the means of
production and the struggle between classes over their ownership and
use.
Under capitalism, labor is utilized for the sake of profit. Capital is
accumulated surplus labor turned against the masses of workers.
That capitalist-imperialism entails the indirect and direct exploitation
of the majority of people by dominant monopoly capital and reveals
widening contradictions inherent in capitalism.
The only alternative to the continued barbarism of imperialism is the
struggle for socialism and communism. Broadly speaking, people’s wars
and united fronts are the most immediate, reliable means to struggle for
communism.
Socialism entails the forceful seizure of power by the proletariat.
However, socialism is not the end of the struggle. Under socialism, the
conditions exist for the development of a ‘new bourgeoisie’ which will
seek to establish itself as a new ruling class. In order to counter this
tendency, class struggle must be waged relentlessly under socialism
through the development of communism.
These are points all Maoists can agree on. Yet these do not capture
all significant features of today’s world.
Comrades! A discourse and struggle over the nature of class under
imperialism is sorely needed.
The Revolutionary Anti-Imperialist Movement puts forward a line that
includes the understanding that a majority section of the populations of
imperialist countries are embourgeoisfied.
This embourgeoification often contours around national oppression cast
in the history of colonialism and settler-colonialism. It is most wholly
construed, however, as an ongoing global distinction between parasitic
workers in imperialist core economies and exploited workers in the vast
Third World periphery.
Though understandings of this split in the working class was popularized
as the ‘labor-aristocracy’ by Lenin, the phenomenon itself was first
noted by Friedrich Engels in a letter to Karl Marx:
“[T]he English proletariat is actually becoming more and more bourgeois,
so that the ultimate aim of this most bourgeois of all nations would
appear to be the possession, alongside the bourgeoisie, of a bourgeois
aristocracy and a bourgeois proletariat. In the case of a nation which
exploits the entire world this is, of course, justified to some extent.”
With some exceptions, Marxists have focused and debated primarily on the
ideological effects of the controversial ‘theory of the labor
aristocracy.’ Unfortunately, less attention has been paid to the
economic dimensions of the ‘labor aristocracy.’
Within the imperialist world-economy, First World workers (a minority of
workers in the world) receive compensation which exceeds the monetary
rate of the full value of labor. In effect, First World workers are a
section of the petty-bourgeoisie due to the fact that they consume a
greater portion of social labor than they concretely expend. This
difference is made up with the super-exploitation of Third World
workers. Because prices (including those of labor power) deviate from
values, this allows First World firms to obtain profits at equivalent
rates while still paying ‘their’ workers a wage above the full monetary
rate of labor value. The First World workers’ compensation above the
monetary rate of the full labor value is also an investment, i.e., a
structural means of by which surplus value is saturated and concentrated
in the core at the expense of the periphery.
The structural elevation of First World workers also has strong
implications for the struggle for communism.
One of the most dangerous and devastatingly popular misconceptions is
that social and political reforms can raise the material standard of
living for Third World workers up to the level enjoyed by First World
workers.
The illusion that Third World peoples can ‘catch up’ with imperialist
countries through various reforms is objectively aided by the common yet
false First Worldist belief that First World workers are exploited as a
class.
If, as the First Worldist line states, First Worlder workers have
attained high wages through reformist class struggle and advanced
technology, then Third World workers should be able to follow a similar
route towards a capitalism modeled after ‘advanced capitalist
countries.’ By claiming that a majority of First Worlders are exploited
proletarians, First Worldism creates the illusion that all workers could
create a similar deal for themselves without overturning capitalism. By
obscuring the fundamental relationship between imperialist exploitation
of Third World workers and embourgeoisfication of First World workers,
First Worldism actually serves to hinder the tide of proletarian
revolution internationally.
Another long-term implication of the global division of workers is the
ecological consequences of the inflated petty-bourgeois lifestyles
enjoyed by the world’s richest 15-20%. First World workers currently
consume and generate waste at a far greater rate than is ecologically
sustainable. The First Worldist line, which effectively states First
World workers should have even greater capacity to consume under a
future socialism (that is, First Worldists believe First Worlders are
entitled to an even greater share of social product than they currently
receive), has obvious utopian qualities which can only misguide the
proletariat over the long term.
It is safe to say that First Worldism is the root cause of the problems
associated with the Revolutionary Communist Party-USA (RCP-USA) and the
Unified Communist Party of Nepal (UCPN).
The RCP-USA, desiring some positive significance to offset its terminal
failure to organize what it sees as a U.S. proletariat, chose to
intervene in various international issues. This typically occurred to
the disservice of the proletarian struggle. Now the RCP-USA heavily
promotes Bob Avakian and his ‘New Synthesis.’ This ‘New Synthesis’ is
better described as an old bag of revisionisms. Today, the RCP-USA, Bob
Avakian, and his revisionist ‘New Synthesis’ is a distraction from many
of the important issues facing the international proletariat.
The UCPN has given up the path of global socialism and communism. It has
instead sought to conciliate and collude with imperialism in hopes of
achieving conditions for class-neutral development. It foolishly assumes
monopoly capital will allow it [to] be anything but ‘red’ compradors or
that Nepal will become anything other than a source of super-exploited
labor. The UCPN has abrogated the task of constructing an independent
economic base and socialist foreign policy. It has instead embarked
hand-in-hand with monopoly capital on a path they wrongly believe will
lead to progressive capitalist development.
Through the examples set forth by both the RCP-USA and the UCPN, it is
evident how First Worldism corrupts even nominal Maoists into becoming
promulgators of the most backwards revisionisms. The RCP-USA is
deceptive and wrong in its claim that it is organizing a U.S.
proletariat. In reality it wrecks the international communist movement
for the sake of the U.S. petty-bourgeois masses. The UCPN, whose
leadership falsely believes capitalist development will bring positive
material effects for the masses of Nepal, has abandoned the struggle for
socialism and communism. The RCP-USA claims to represent what it wrongly
describes as an exploited U.S. proletariat. The UCPN takes great
inspiration in the level of material wealth attained by what it wrongly
assumes to be an exploited First World proletariat.
Comrades! Our analysis must start with the questions, “Who are our
enemies? Who are our friends?” These questions must be answered foremost
in the structural sense (i.e., how do groups fundamentally relate to the
process of capital accumulation), secondly in the historical sense
(i.e., what can history tell us about such class divisions and their
implications for today), and lastly in a political sense, (i.e., given
what we know about the complex nature of class structures of modern
imperialism, how can we best organize class alliances so as to advance
the revolutionary interests of the proletariat at large).
First Worldism is a fatal flaw. It is both a hegemonic narrative within
the ‘left’ and a trademark of reformism, revisionism, and chauvinism.
Unfortunately, First Worldism is all-too-common within international
Maoism.
Comrades! The consistent struggle against First Worldism is an extension
of the communist struggle against both social chauvinism and the theory
of the productive forces. As such, it is the duty of all genuine
Communists to struggle against First Worldism.
Comrades! First Worldism has already done enough damage to our forces
internationally. Now is the time to struggle against First Worldism and
decisively break with the errors of the past.
The importance of knowing “who are our enemies” and “who are our
friends” never goes away. Instead, those who fail in these
understandings are prone to wider deviations. Gone unchecked, First
Worldism sets back the struggle for communism.
Comrades! We hope the topics of class under imperialism and the
necessity of the struggle against First Worldism come up as specific
points of future discussion within and between Maoist organizations. The
raising of these questions and the firm refutation of First Worldism
will mark a qualitative advance for international communism.
Click to download PDF of the CDCR’s March 14, 2013 memo to prisoners
about what constitutes Security Threat Group rule violations.
14 March 2013 - Prisoners in California received a memo advising them of
the expectations placed on them by the state in regards to the new
expanded “Security Threat Group” policies. When thousands of prisoners
across California went on hunger strike to protest torturous conditions
in the Security Housing Units, the California Department of Corrections
and Rehabilitation(CDCR) asserted that they were already working on the
issue. This was what they were working on. Previously they offered “gang
validation” to prisoners deemed to be affiliated with one of a handful
of “prison gangs” within the system. This new policy expands the gang
validation, and therefore long-term isolation torture, to all sorts of
organizations that are deemed “criminal” or even just “disruptive.” Keep
in mind that if prisoners stand up against staff abuses, this is
considered “disruptive” behavior and such prisoners face regular
retaliation. While none of this is new, it is now official policy.
This new policy marks the continued decline of First Amendment rights
for prisoners in this country. The state wants it to be illegal for
prisoners to affiliate with each other for any reason. They want to keep
them isolated in little cages with no contact with each other or the
outside world. While many in this country still defend Amerika as
promoting freedom, prisoners and the oppressed nations in general know
that this “freedom” does not apply to everyone.
MIM(Prisons) joins in United Front with all prisoners in California who
are now actively building resistance to these policies through the
courts and through peaceful organizing and actions.
[Memo Passed out to prisoners 3/14/2013]
STATE OF CALIFONRIA(sic) CDCR 2260 (10/12) Attachment E
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION Advisement of Expectations
It is the mission of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) to preserve public safety and provide offenders with opportunities to take responsibility for their lives and improve their chances of becoming productive members of the community.
The CDCR maintains a zero tolerance for gang and security threat group activities and behavior. Within the CDCR, prison gangs, street gangs, and disruptive groups are referred to as Security Threat Groups (STG). CDCR maintains a pro-active approach to STG management.
Offenders found guilty of violating criminal or administrative statutes shall be dealt with 'in a manner consistent with department policy. This shall include, but not be limited to, loss of privileges, increase in custody level, loss of work credits, segregation from the general population, and/or referral for criminal prosecution.
It is your responsibility to abstain from activities that assist, promote, or endorse any STG within or outside this facility/institution. Your responsibility includes familiarizing yourself with laws and regulations that govern STG activity including the Security Threat Group Instructional Memorandum, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 15, Division 3, Sections 3000, 3023, 3314, 3315, 3323, 33,41.5, and 3378, and Department Operations Manual Chapter 5, Article 22. Some of which are outlined below.
CCR (Pilot), Section 3314, Administrative Rule Violations, states in part: (a)(3) Administrative rule violations include but are not limited to; (a)(3)(L) Security Threat Group Contraband: Possessing or displaying any distinctive materials, symbols, clothing, signs, colors, artwork, photographs, or other paraphernalia associated with any Security Threat Group; (a) (3) (M) Security Threat Group Behavior: Demonstrating or exhibiting any unique behaviors clearly associated with a STG that promotes, furthers or assists any Security Threat Group.
Examples of this behavior or activities include: *Active Participation in STG Roll Call; *Participating in STG Group Exercise; *Using hand signs, gestures, handshakes, slogans, distinctive clothing, graffiti which specifically relate to an STG; *In Possession of Artwork (other than self created and not original) clearly depicting recognized STG symbols; *In Possession of Photographs that depict STG Association. Must include STG connotations such as insignia, symbols, or other validated STG affiliates;
CCR (Pilot), Section 3315, Serious Rule Violations, states in part (a)(3) Serious rule violations include but are not limited to: (a) (3) (Y) Security Threat Group Directing or Controlling Behavior. Demonstrating activity, behavior or status as a' recognized member and/or leader of an STG, which jeopardizes the safety of the public, staff, or other inmate(s), and/or the security and order of the institution. (a) (3) (Z) Security Threat Group, Disruptive or Violent Behavior: Demonstrating involvement in activities or an event associated with a STG, which jeopardizes the safety of the public, staff, or other inmate(s), and/or the security and order of the institution,
CCR (Pilot), Section 3323, Disciplinary Credit Forfeiture Schedule, states in part (h) Division "F" offenses; credit forfeiture of 0-30 days. (h)(11) Harassment of another person, group, or entity either directly or indirectly through the use of the mail, telephone., or other means. (h) (12) Security Threat Group Behavior or Activity. (A) Recording/documentation of telephone conversation evidencing active STG behavior; (B) Communication between offenders regarding STG behavior or activities; (C) Directing Active Participation in STG Roll Call; (D) Directing Cadence for STG Group Exercise; (E) Wearing, possessing, using, distributing, displaying, or selling any clothing, jewelry, emblems, badges, symbols, signs, or other items with the intent to intimidate, promote membership, or depict affiliation in a STG; (F) In possession of self-created or original artwork clearly depicting recognized STG symbols; (G) In personal possession of STG related written material including membership or enemy list, constitution, organizational structures, codes, training material, etc.; (H) In personal possession of mail, notes, greeting cards, or other communications including coded messages evidencing active STG behavior.
The CDCR will review all criminal gangs and disruptive groups and assign a Security Threat Group level to each.
STG-I will consist of criminal gangs and/or historically based prison gangs that the CDCR has determined to be the most severe threat to the security of the institutions and communities based on a history and propensity for violence and/or influence over other groups. Based upon their individual threat, clandestine operations, and influence over other STG affiliates, inmates who are validated as STG-I members will be in segregated housing based solely upon their validation. Validated STG-I associates will normally remain housed in general population unless confirmed STG behavior or activities, some of which are described above, are present. If these behaviors or activities are present, the STG-I associate will be considered for segregated housing and placement into a five year step down program.
STG-II will consist of other criminal gangs such as street gangs or disruptive groups comprised of members and associates who may be determined to be in a subservient role to the more dominant STG-I type groups. Validated STG-II members or associates will remain housed in general population unless two or more confirmed STG behavior or activities are present. If these behaviors or activities are present, STG-II member or associate will be considered for segregated housing and placement into a five year step down program.
I have been provided a copy of this document.
Offender Signature CDCR # Date Signed __ | | Inmate Refused to Sign
Printed Staff Name Signature Date
Distribution: Original - Central File; Copy - Inmate
The fiance of a prisoner in Santa Barbara County Jail is leading the
call to oppose a new rule banning all letters to prisoners. The Sheriff
has restricted incoming mail to postcards only citing “security”
reasons, as they always do. They say this, despite the well-established
fact that ties to family and the outside world help prisoners
rehabilitate and reduces conflicts. This is why
we
question how prison authorities define “security.”
Nearby Ventura County Jail already has a ban on letters in place, and
has recently rolled out an email program that allows them to charge
prisoners.(1) One might think that they’re cutting out the U.S. Postal
Service because they can’t get a cut of the money. But as we recently
pointed out, another
advantage
to going digital is easier monitoring of all communications with
prisoners.
The rights of prisoners are limited in so many ways, making them a
vulnerable population facing increased risks of violence, rape, suicide
and many health problems. Even after release prisoners face increased
rates of poverty and shorter life spans. Education, communication and
integration with the outside world are important parts of any effort to
rehabilitate those who are rightfully imprisoned.
MIM(Prisons) supports this campaign to allow prisoners in Santa Barbara
County Jail to receive letters, just as we combat censorship in prisons
across the country. Those facing censorship from Santa Barbara can
provide public records to our
online Censorship in
Amerika Documentation Project.
In the April 2013 issue of Turning the
Tide (TTT), the editor, MN (who we assume is Michael
Novick, the author of the original article in question), responded to
a
letter that a United Struggle from Within comrade wrote criticizing
an article in the previous TTT issue which misrepresented the
MIM political line in a critique of MIM(Prisons). The editor claims that
they are happy that this article provoked quite a few responses and that
they want to promote debate because “this is a contradiction among the
people.” This is a correct attitude, which unfortunately is not backed
up by the TTT editor’s response, which is embarrassing in its
blatant misrepresentation and misinformation about the MIM line. It is
very difficult to carry out debate to resolve contradictions among the
people, if the people involved are not serious about political study.
The first critique the editor makes of the MIM line this time around is
“in its staunch defense of the significance of the contradiction between
oppressor and oppressed nations, and its doctrinaire reliance on its
version of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, it petrifies all other
contradictions and the flow of history.” The MIM line in question, which
MIM(Prisons)
upholds, holds that the oppressor vs. oppressed nations
contradiction is principal at this point in history, but not that it
will always be so. And further, the MIM line puts much work into
illuminating the gender and class contradictions. In fact, it has pushed
forward the political understanding of class more than any other
contemporary revolutionary organization by noting that the changing
class nature of the imperialist country population has resulted in a
primarily petty bourgeois population. The TTT editor writes
about workers: “we have stakes and ties in the very system that
oppresses and exploits us” a line s/he claims comes from Lenin, denying
that anything might have changed since Lenin’s day. On this point it is
actually TTT that is dogmatic in its view of contradictions and
the flow of history by refusing to study the true nature of the
imperialist country working class.
The TTT editor goes on to misrepresent the MIM line writing
“…by classifying all working people within the US as ‘oppressor nation
petty-bourgeois labor aristocrats’ [MIM] disarms those who have the
capacity to break both their chains and their identification with and
links to the Empire.” This is such a blatant mistake we have to assume
TTT has not bothered to read any of the
MIM theory on
nation. MIM line is very clear that “oppressor nation
petty-bourgeois” are just that: white nation people. There is also a
sizable oppressed nation petty-bourgeois population within U.$. borders,
and we see their class interest as tied with imperialism, but we
identify their national interests as anti-imperialist. And this national
contradiction is internal to imperialism.
Finally the TTT editor goes into some convolutions to try to
explain how the majority of the U.$. population is exploited but maybe
just not super-exploited because “no private employer hires a worker
unless they’re pretty damn sure the work that worker does will make the
boss more money than the boss has to pay for the work.” By this
definition, we can assume that the top layers of management of huge
corporations are exploited in their six figure salaries (or even 7
figure salaries!). TTT doesn’t even attempt to make a
scientific analysis of where to draw the line on who is exploited, and
since MIM(Prisons) and MIM before us has done extensive work on this we
will not bother to explain it again here. We refer serious readers to
our
publications
on the labor aristocracy.
In the contortions to justify calling the Amerikan population exploited,
the TTT editor asks “If the domestic population is totally
bribed and benefiting from Empire to the exclusion of any contradiction”
then why are gulags necessary? That’s a fine straw-persyn argument, but
it’s not a line that MIM(Prisons) takes. We have written extensively
about the role of prisons in the U.$. population as a tool of social
control of the oppressed nations, highlighting internal contradictions
that include nation among others. Again, it seems TTT has not
bothered to read even the
single-page description
of MIM(Prisons) that we publish in every issue of Under Lock
& Key.
The TTT editor concludes by asking a myriad of very good
questions about nations and their inter-relations, all of which the MIM
line has addressed in a consistent way, and for the most part a way that
it seems the TTT editor would agree with, if s/he had bothered
to read up on that line. The supposed rigid and dogmatic line of
MIM/MIM(Prisons) is all in the heads of the TTT writers and
editors who seem to think our line comes from just a few slogans. We
agree that “Revolutionary strategy must be based on a concrete analysis
of concrete conditions, not arbitrary, fixed categories, to determine
friends and enemies.” And we challenge TTT to take up this concrete
analysis. Read our work on the labor aristocracy and on nations, and
tell us specifically where you find our concrete analysis lacking or in
error. We welcome such dialogue, but the revolutionary movement doesn’t
have time for slander and false accusations in the guise of political
debate.
The last point we will make here is related to a letter TTT
published in this same issue, from a prisoner who goes by “Ruin.” Ruin
wrote to say that s/he shares the TTT views about
MIM(Prisons)’s ideological shortcomings and is upset because s/he was
kicked out of our study group. We are happy that Ruin has found an
organization with which s/he has unity. In fact in previous letters to
h, where we pointed out our theoretical disagreements, we suggested
other organizations that might be more closely aligned with h views. We
run study groups for prisoners who want to work with MIM(Prisons) in
both political study and organizing. We stand by the letter we sent to
Ruin (which TTT printed) where we explain that it is not a good
use of our time to include people in our advanced study groups who
disagree with us on many fundamental issues. Ruin told us the first
study group was a waste of h time, and that s/he doesn’t agree with us
on many things, so we’re not even sure why Ruin would take issue with
our decision that s/he should not continue into the advanced study
group. We did not suggest that we would discontinue Ruin’s free
subscription to ULK or that we would stop responding to h
letters, it was Ruin who chose to sever all ties and discussion with
MIM(Prisons) after receiving our letter about the study group.
Criticism is hard to take, but it is something we in the revolutionary
movement must handle in a direct manner, without letting persynal
feelings get in the way. It is also important to know when two lines
have diverged significantly enough that those lines should be in
separate organizations. History will tell which political line is
correct.
Proletarian
migrants
have fed much of the growth in the prison population within U.$.
borders in recent years. As a result they are getting a taste of the
torture tactics Amerikans use against their own citizens. A recent
report showed that U.$. Immigration and Customs Enforcement holds about
300 migrants in solitary confinement in 50 of its largest detention
facilities, which account for 85% of their detainees. Half of them are
held in solitary for 15 days or more and about 35 of the 300 are held
more than 75 days.(1)
While these terms are relatively short compared to what has become
normal in the United $tates, the experiences are particularly difficult
for migrants who don’t speak English and have been the victims of humyn
trafficking.
The authors of the article cited above cautiously state that the United
$tates uses solitary confinement more “than any other democratic nation
in the world.” This implies that other countries may use solitary
confinement more. One reason they cannot get stats on imprisonment
practices in some countries is that they are U.$. puppet regimes
purposely run under a veil of secrecy to allow extreme forms of
repression of the most oppressed peoples. We have seen no evidence of a
mythical nation that is torturing more people in solitary confinement
than Amerika.
Amerikans imprison more people than any other nation even if we exclude
the people they are holding in prisons in other countries. With at least
100,000 people in
long-term isolation within U.S. borders, it seems unlikely that any
other country can top that. Further evidence exists by looking at the
state of prisons in many Third World countries, which are far more open
than even the low security prisons in the United $tates. And the
exceptions to this rule are all countries with heavy Amerikan
military/intelligence activity, and usually Amerikans themselves are
running the prisons.(3)
U.$. citizen Shane Bauer was imprisoned on charges of spying by the
government of Iran, which is independent from the United $tates. Bauer
offers examples of how his time in solitary confinement differed in both
positive and negative ways to those held in Pelican Bay SHU in
California. But one stark contrast is the time in solitary, which for
him was only four months. In a comparison of the “democratic” U.$.
injustice system and that of Iran, Bauer wrote:
“When Josh Fattal and I finally came before the Revolutionary Court in
Iran, we had a lawyer present, but weren’t allowed to speak to him. In
California, an inmate facing the worst punishment our penal system has
to offer short of death can’t even have a lawyer in the room. He can’t
gather or present evidence in his defense. He can’t call witnesses. Much
of the evidence – anything provided by informants – is confidential and
thus impossible to refute. That’s what Judge Salavati told us after our
prosecutor spun his yarn about our role in a vast American-Israeli
conspiracy: There were heaps of evidence, but neither we nor our lawyer
were allowed to see it.”(2)
He later cites a U.$. court ruling:
“the judge ruled that ‘a prisoner has no constitutionally guaranteed
immunity from being falsely or wrongfully accused of conduct which may
result in the deprivation of a protected liberty interest.’ In other
words, it is not illegal for prison authorities to lie in order to lock
somebody away in solitary.”(2)
California’s notorious Pelican Bay reports an average time spent in the
Security Housing Unit there as 7.5 years. Many who fought for national
liberation from U.$. imperialism have spent 30 to 40 years in solitary
confinement in prisons across the United $tates. MIM(Prisons) has not
seen reports of long-term isolation used to this extreme by any other
government.
The torture techniques used in Amerikan control units were developed to
break the spirits of people and social groups that have challenged the
status quo, and in particular U.$. imperialism. Thirty years after their
demise,
materials
from the Black Panther Party still get people in trouble regularly,
sometimes even with a “Security Threat Group” charge. That’s the
Amerikan term for a thought crime.
It could be that these techniques are being expanded into migrant
detention centers as a form of discipline of the Mexican proletariat
that Amerikans fear as a force of social change. Or it could just be a
case of oppressor nation culture spreading its tentacles into other
nations. Either way, this is just one of many forms of oppression that
serve to undermine the propaganda
myth
of Amerika as a nation that promotes freedom.
For years, the United $tates has been under criticism by the United
Nations as the principal state using torture in the form of long-term
isolation. Today, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
said, “We must be clear about this: the United States is in clear breach
not just of its own commitments but also of international laws and
standards that it is obliged to uphold.”(4) This was in a statement
addressing the 166 foreign nationals held in Guantanamo Bay Prison for
more than a decade, most without charges.
Just as high-tech weaponry could not win the war in Afghanistan for the
Amerikans, the sophisticated torture techniques of the modern control
unit cannot overcome the widespread outrage of the masses living under
imperialist domination. The opportunities for making internationalist
connections to the prison movement within U.$. borders only increases as
more people from outside those borders get swept up in the system.
The example set by those who went on food strike in California was like
Rosa Parks refusing to sit in the back of the bus. They weren’t the
first to do it, and they didn’t single-handedly change the system, or
even significantly reform it. But they did serve as a prime example that
continues to inspire those struggling for basic humyn rights behind
bars. Since 2011, MIM(Prisons) has been in dialogue with USW leaders in
Pelican Bay and across the state about those historic events, and how we
can push that struggle forward.
One change that has been proposed by comrades in Pelican Bay this time
around is that prisoners develop their own demands locally and hold the
CDCR/state to the demands that they think are most pressing. While,
ideally we would all unite around one set of demands, we agree with this
tactic at this stage. There were many who came out to propose changes to
the
five
core demands for many different reasons. So this approach allows
those who had critiques to put their ideas into action.
In practice this means each prison could have their own demands focused
on conditions specific to their location, building unity within the
prisoner population at that facility. We caution people though that the
broader our unity behind core demands the more pressure we can put on
the criminal injustice system to make change. As much as possible,
prisoners should try to come together around common demands within each
prison.
MIM(Prisons) is working to unite United Struggle from Within (USW) in CA
around some goals that are strategic for the anti-imperialist prison
movement. These are goals that could be won within the realm of
bourgeois democracy and will strengthen our cause and more long-term
goals.
Please note that neither USW nor the statewide councils are able to
operate on the basis of democratic centralism through postal mail. So
while this draft incorporates the ideas of the California Council of
USW, it is principally authored by MIM(Prisons) and does not/will not
necessarily represent a consensus among council members or USW in
general. However, the two principal points are points that MIM(Prisons)
has long held to be strategically important in expanding the ability of
the oppressed to reach the medium-term goals of organizing for
self-determination. So we do not believe that they will be very
controversial within our circles. We do hope they will push the limits
of what is possible more than what has been proposed so far.
If there are already demands in place where you are, we’d encourage you
to push for an inclusion of more focus on these goals. If not you may
still need to adjust the document below to meet your local conditions
for various reasons. But we should all be able to agree on what the
major issues are here, and the more we can speak as a united voice with
a united mission, the more successful we can be. There is very little in
here that is specific to California, so comrades in other states can
also use this as a model.
Here are our demands:
An end to torture of all prisoners, including an end to the use of
Security Housing Units (SHU) as long-term isolation prisons.
Basic humyn needs are centered around 1) healthy food and water, 2)
fresh air and exercise, 3) clothes and shelter from the elements and 4)
social interactions and community with other humyns. It is the SHU’s
failure to provide for these basic needs that have led people around the
world to condemn long-term isolation as torture. Therefore we demand
that the following minimum standards be met for all prisoners:
no prisoner should be held in Security Housing Units for longer than 30
days. Rehouse all prisoners currently in SHU to mainline facilities.
interaction with other prisoners every day
time spent outdoors with space and basic equipment for exercise every
day
healthy food and clean water every day
proper clothing and climate control
an end to the use of and threat of violence by staff against prisoners
who have not made any physical threat to others
access to phone calls and contact visits with family at least once a
week
timely and proper health care
ability to engage in productive activities, including correspondence
courses and hobby crafts
a meaningful way to grieve any abuses or denial of the above basic
rights
Freedom of association.
As social beings, people in prison will always develop relationships
with other prisoners. We believe positive and productive relationships
should be encouraged. Currently the CDCR makes it a crime punishable by
torture (SHU) to affiliate with certain individuals or organizations.
This is contrary to the judiciary’s interpretation of the First
Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. We demand that prisoners of the
state of California only be punished for violating the law, and that
there be:
no punishment based on what books one reads or has in their
possession
no punishment for jailhouse lawyering for oneself or for others, for
filing grievances or for any challenges to conditions of confinement
through legal means
no punishment for what outside organizations one belongs to or
corresponds with
no punishment for communicating with other prisoners if not breaking the
law
no punishment for tattoos
no punishment for what individuals of the same
race/nation/organizational affiliation do unless you as an individual
were involved in violating a rule or the law, i.e. no group
punishment
no punishment for affiliation with a gang, security threat group, or
other organization - in other words a complete end to the gang
validation system that punishes people (currently puts people in the SHU
for an indeterminate amount of time) based on their affiliation and/or
ideology without having broken any rules or laws
The above goals are very similar to the original five core demands.
However, you’ll notice that they boil down to two main points, an end to
torture of prisoners and freedom of association. Until both of these
goals are fully achieved, the struggle continues.
Over the coming months, comrades behind bars need to focus on setting
goals, setting deadlines, strategizing, studying and networking. The
comrades in Pelican Bay are sticking to similar tactics used in the 2011
food strike. But there are other ways to demonstrate for our goals in a
peaceful way that is long-lasting and can have great impact, just like
Rosa Parks. One comrade last year suggested
campaigns
that affect the prison staff directly and financially, and there may
be other tactics to consider. As the comrades in California have
stressed, networking to break down divisions between prisoners must be a
focus by implementing the peace protocol across the state. And as USW
leaders have reiterated,
study
is instrumental in raising the consciousness of participants and allies
to provide for a stronger base as the struggle advances.
We’ve heard from comrades in
Washington,
New Jersey and South Carolina who are organizing their own actions for
July 8 or modeled around that struggle. Comrades in
North
Carolina and
Texas
have launched peaceful protests of their own in just the last couple
months. As we address local conditions and petition institutions at the
state level, we build unity around the common demands of the imprisoned
lumpen class across the United $tates.
MIM(Prisons) is working on a book about the lumpen in the internal
semi-colonies of the United $tates. The first chapter, which we are
circulating in draft form for peer review, focuses on identifying the
lumpen and calculating the size of this group within U.$. borders. Part
of this identification first requires that we understand the definition
of the lumpen as distinct from other classes.
The proletariat is the class exploited by the bourgeoisie, receiving
less than the value of their labor, and basically with nothing to lose
but their chains. Marxists include in the proletariat many unemployed
people who constitute a reserve army of workers, available to replace
proletarian workers if they become too slow, get sick, organize strikes,
or otherwise displease the bourgeoisie. These unemployed help to keep
wages low, and while temporarily unemployed, are still a part of the
working class in the long term. The lumpenproletariat is the class of
people that is permanently unemployed.
In a recent article, Nikolai Brown got into the calculation of how we
define the proletariat in the United $tates. Brown calculated the total
value of labor by dividing the number of working hours by the total
value produced:
“In 2011, the global GDP was $69,110,000,000,000. The total population
was estimated mid-year to be 7,021,836,029. Let us assume that half of
people regularly work. In this case, each worker produces about $20,000
per year. This would be the value of labor. Furthermore, if we assume
each worker works 40 hours a week for 50 weeks a year, the value of
labor is $10 an hour.”(1)
This is very relevant at a time when President Obama is promoting a
raise in the federal minimum wage to $9/hour. Brown went on to emphasize
the position of the majority of workers in the world: “As it stands,
estimates of the global median income float between $1,250 and
$1,700/year, $8,750- $8,300/year less than the estimated value of
labor.”
In a response to this article from ServethePeople, we find an important
addition to these calculations:
“Bear in mind that not all of production can be distributed as personal
income: much of it goes to the means of production, infrastructure,
public works, waste, and other ends. If even half of production
(probably a considerable overestimate) is available for distribution as
personal income, then the value of labor, by the above calculation, is
only $5 per hour. Even the minimum ‘wage’ in the imperialist countries
is greater than that, so every last First World ‘worker’ is a parasite.”
The point about distributing value produced is true whether we are
talking about capitalism or socialism. The difference is not that the
worker gets all the value they produce in their pocket, but that all the
value they produce goes to serve the collective interests and not
private profit.
MIM(Prisons) agrees with this calculation, and it informs our
determination of who falls into the First World lumpen. We can see from
this calculation that there is virtually no proletariat in the United
$tates. Our goal is to separate out the very small proletariat and the
large group of petty bourgeoisie people from the lumpen class.
This movie claims to chronicle the decade-long hunt for Osama bin Laden
after the September 2001 attack, culminating in his death in May 2011.
This is a hollywood film, so we can’t expect an accurate documentary.
But that doesn’t really matter since the movie will represent what
Amerikans think of when they picture the CIA’s work in the Middle East.
And what they get is a propaganda film glorifying Amerikan torture of
prisoners, and depicting Pakistani people as violent and generally
pretty stupid. From start to finish there is nothing of value in this
movie, and a lot of harmful and misleading propaganda. The main message
that revolutionaries should take from it revolves around government
information gathering. From tracking phones to networks of people
watching and following individuals, the government has extensive and
sophisticated techniques at their disposal, and even the most cautious
will have a very hard time avoiding even a small amount of government
surveillance.
The plot focuses almost exclusively on a CIA agent, “Maya,” who devoted
her career to finding clues to Osama bin Laden’s whereabouts. Early in
the film there are a lot of graphic scenes of prisoners being tortured
to get information, including waterboarding, beatings, cages, and food
and sleep deprivation. Maya is bothered by the torture initially, but
quickly adapts and joins in the interrogations. The movie is very
pro-torture, showing critical information coming from every single
tortured prisoner, ignoring the fact that so many prisoners held in
Amerikan detention facilities after 9/11 were never charged, committed
no crimes, and had no information. Throughout the film there are
constant digs against Obama’s ban on torture as a method of extracting
information in 2009. Ironically, in the movie the CIA still found Osama
bin Laden, using no torture after the ban. But we’re left understanding
that it would have been much easier if the CIA still had free reign with
prisoners.
Although Zero Dark Thirty portrays Obama as soft on terror and
a hindrance to the CIA’s work, we should not be fooled into thinking
that the U.$. government has really ended the use of torture. While we
have no clear information about what goes on in interrogation cells in
other countries, we know that right here in U.$. prisons, torture is
used daily. And this domestic torture is usually not even focused on
getting information, it’s either sadistic entertainment for prison staff
or punishment for political organizing. In one example of this, a USW
comrade who wrote about
Amerikan
prison control units died shortly after his article was printed,
under suspicious circumstances in Attica Correctional Facility.
Banning certain interrogation techniques, even if that ban is actually
enforced in the Third World, is just an attempt to put makeup on the
hideous face of imperialism. Even if no Amerikan citizen ever practices
torture on Third World peoples (something we know isn’t true), the fact
is that the United $tates prefers to pay proxies to carry out its dirty
work anyway. Torture, military actions, rape, theft, etc., can all be
done at a safe distance by paying neo-colonial armies and groups to work
on behalf of the Amerikan government.
Whether actions are carried out by Navy SEALs, CIA agents, or proxy
armies and individuals, Amerikan imperialism is working hard to keep the
majority of the world’s people under control and available for
exploitation. The death of bin Laden is portrayed as a big victory in
Zero Dark Thirty, but for the majority of the world’s people
this was just one more example of Amerikan militarism, a system that
works against the material interests of most people in the world.
7 March 2013 – Today marks the 1-year anniversary of a truce between two
rival lumpen organizations (LOs) in El Salvador, Barrio 18 and Mara
Salvatrucha-13. The truce has its origins inside Salvadoran prisons,
where secret meetings were mediated by members of the Church, and
facilitated by the Salvadoran government. The result was a shuffling
around of LO members to different prisons, and a reduction of the
homicide rate in El Salvador from 14 per day to 5.(1)
Background
Without getting too deep into the origins of Barrio 18 and Mara
Salvacrucha-13 (MS-13), it is significant to note that they both
originated in Los Angeles, California (Barrio 18 in the 1950s-60s, MS-13
in the 1980s). Barrio 18 was originally made up of Mexican nationals but
adapted its recruiting base as Latinos of other backgrounds migrated to
southern California. MS-13 emerged from refugees of the civil war in El
Salvador who had congregated in Los Angeles. In the 1990s, policy
changes in the U.$. government led to the deportation of thousands of LO
members back to their home countries, where their respective LOs were
not yet established. In El Salvador, both groups took off.
The political climate in the 1990s in El Salvador was marked by an end
to the civil war in 1992. Not surprisingly, the local conditions
contributed to the ease of recruitment for these LOs. One of the Barrio
18 members who participated in the peace talks, Carlos Mojica, told the
Christian Science Monitor “the streets were left filled with weapons,
orphaned children, conditions of extreme poverty, disintegrated
households.”(2) These are ripe conditions for the proliferation of
street organizations. When youth have no support and adults have no
jobs, they must turn to other means for survival.
Change of Heart
Some cite an incident in June 2011 as a peak in the violence of these
two organizations, which was a reality check for many. Barrio 18 has
been blamed by the Salvadoran government and many citizens for a bus
burning which killed at least 14 people in Mejicanos, San Salvador. This
bus burning received media attention worldwide, and was accompanied by a
bus shooting the same evening which killed 3 people. All the targets of
this violence were reported to be unaffiliated citizens and travelers.
Others cite time and persynal experience as what changed their minds
about violence. In the United $tates, many, if not most, LO members age
out into the labor aristocracy or petty-bourgeoisie. But this isn’t an
option in El Salvador which is not an exploiter country with a
bought-off labor aristocracy. Members who would otherwise be aging out
of the LO if they were U.$. citizens, instead see an imperative need to
change the conditions for themselves and younger generations.(2) MS-13
member Dany Mendez told BBC News “I have lost too many friends and
relatives in the violence. We don’t want another war because we are
thinking about our children.”(3)
Of course many activists in the United $tates, including MIM(Prisons)
and signatories of the United Front for Peace in Prisons, see a need to
end lumpen-on-lumpen violence in this country. But it’s clear that
conditions here are much better than in El Salvador in that a
significant portion of people can leave their days of wylin’ out in
their past and move on to join the oppressor classes. The material
conditions which lead to movement of the lumpen class in the United
$tates is explored in our forthcoming book. How much these differences
in material conditions affects the movement in this country toward peace
between lumpen organizations will be determined by those of us working
for this peace.
Moving Forward
The peace agreement between MS-13 and Barrio 18 has not been touted as
an end to the violence forever, but instead is framed as “a break in the
violence so the various stakeholders can work out long-term
solutions.”(4) Since the beginning, the peacemakers have been calling on
the Salvadoran government to generate jobs and work with former and
current LO members on developing skills that will help them make a
living without relying on violence.
Last month, a program was initiated by U.$. Agency for International
Development (USAID), in partnership with Salvadoran businesses and
non-governmental organizations, in a purported effort to prevent youth
from joining LOs in the first place. They claim this program has nothing
to do with the truce, and have no intention of helping people who have
already chosen or been forced to join a lumpen organization.(5)
Considering the long history of U.$. neocolonialism in Central America,
it is not surprising that U$AID is putting their 2 cents in. Time will
tell the long-term effects of this $42 million investment, but we can
safely assume it will amount to manipulation of the Salvadoran people by
the United $tates government.(6)
After one solid year, the truce has withstood everyone’s doubts and has
not been broken. If the government is not going to step up to help
prevent the violence, then the LOs will have to organize to do it
themselves. One of the principles of the United Front for Peace in
Prisons is Independence, which is just as important in El Salvador where
the United $tates has dominated politics and the economy. We see today
where U.$. intervention has gotten them thus far. MS-13 and Barrio 18
members know what their communities need better than U.$. investors do,
and they should be supported in their efforts to change. It is our
strong suspicion that those looking to change the conditions in which
they live in any substantive way will eventually find that an end to
capitalism itself is the order of the day.
One such organization which is supporting the peace treaty in El
Salvador is Homies Unidos, which has chapters in Los Angeles and El
Salvador.
Alex
Sanchez is the director of Homies Unidos in LA, and in recent
history has been targeted by the FBI for harassment and detainment.(7)
The bogus charges were finally dropped last month after restricting his
ability to work for years. We tried to get in touch with Homies Unidos
to gather more information on the real effects of the peace treaty on
the ground, and what more is needed to maintain and advance the peace,
but unfortunately we have not heard back.
