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.
MIM(Prisons) has six
cardinal principles, all of which we believe the Leading Light
Communist Organization (LLCO) upholds to the degree that we consider
them fraternal. As such, we distribute some of their better work, which
is likely why you are reading this review. LLCO is one of very few who
work within the legacy of the MIM to a significant degree.
This is our first review of the Leading Light Communist Organization by
that name, but the theoretical journal Monkey Smashes Heaven predates
the LLCO. We reviewed them in 2009 in
Maoism
Around Us and addressed them later that year in
What
is sectarianism?
The latter article criticized MSH’s nihilist approach to the struggles
that comrades from the Maoist Internationalist Party - Amerika went
through in their last days. Unfortunately, their sectarianism has only
increased since forming LLCO. In their 10 criteria set forth in the
beginning of MSH 1 for who they consider to be a communist, the
number one point is you must uphold their ideology called “Maoism-Third
Worldism”, now “Leading Light Communism.” This amounts to saying, “we
see you as fraternal if you think exactly like us.” Cardinal principles
should be a handful of the most important issues of the day that define
the communist movement. The expectation that the only correct political
organizations are those that share identical ideologies leads quickly to
the Trotskyist requirement that revolution must be led by a single
global organization imposing its will on all countries.
As we addressed already in “Maoism Around Us”, we do not recognize an
advancement of revolutionary science beyond Maoism as MSH claims Leading
Light Communism is. After reviewing MSH 1 and MSH 2,
MIM(Prisons) still fails to see the unique contributions that MSH/LLCO
claim to have made to constitute a new stage of revolutionary science.
They state this repeatedly in their journals, without explaining what
exactly distinguishes Leading Light Communism from Maoism.
The one partial explanation they do provide on p. 51 of MSH 1
is that they were the first to scientifically explain that there “is no
significant revolutionary class or socioeconomic group in the First
World.” MIM was the first to put together a lot of the theories on the
labor aristocracy into a coherent class analysis of the First World. Yet
even they acknowledged that the main points were not new to Lenin, and
even Engels had talked about the buying off of whole nations. LLCO has
written some interesting new articles on the subject, but has not
advanced the theoretical concepts in any way. Where LLCO disagrees with
MIM is on the question of internal semi-colonies being potentially
revolutionary in the First World. The buying off of internal
semi-colonies was most thoroughly addressed in MIM’s “On the Internal
Class Structure of the Internal Semi-Colonies” and recognized as early
as 1992 in MIM Theory 1. We have yet to see LLCO address this issue in
any detail. We have yet to see them explain the revolutionary
nationalism of just a couple generations ago and why it could not happen
again, or even surpass previous experiences. They simply dismiss the
possibility with no analysis or explanation.
While opportunistically presenting as the heir apparent to MIM on
Wikipedia, they almost never cite MIM or use MIM language except to
criticize MIM. In reading the first two print editions of their journal
LLCO takes similar approaches to the theoretical contributions of Marx,
Lenin and Mao. This takes their sectarianism to another level of
knocking down all of their predecessors as inadequate in the face of
their supposedly advanced analysis.
Finally, their sectarian thinking leads to a cultish approach to
organizing, rather than teaching people how to think and solve problems.
While always being sure to hype LLCO as the most advanced, they rarely
explain why. It is the job of the vanguard to raise the scientific
understanding of others through struggle, not to simply encourage them
to follow the leading light.
We won’t list all the things we agree with in the first two issues of
MSH here. The articles from MSH that we choose to distribute in our own
study packs can speak for themselves in how correct they are. We
generally agree with the content of those articles except for the points
above, and we distribute them because they add new insight into the
topics of study.
The point of guerrilla war is not to succeed, it’s always been
just to make the enemy bleed. Depriving the soldiers of the peace of
mind that they need. Bullets are hard to telegraph when they bob and
they weave. The only way a guerrilla war can ever be over, is when
the occupation can’t afford more soldiers. Until they have to draft
the last of you into the service, and you refuse because you don’t
see the purpose. - Immortal Technique, the Martyr
Afghan protesters stomp out police car in Herat
In just over a week, six Amerikan soldiers have been killed by Afghan
patriots within the state military that is supposedly working with the
U.$. occupation. Nominally triggered by reports of the U.$. military
burning copies of the Koran, these killings bring the number of NATO
troops killed by their Afghan “allies” to 36 in the last year. This is a
significant increase from previous years and some have suggested no
other “native ally” of U.$. imperialism has compared.(1) While tiny in
comparison to the loss of life by the occupied population, these
incidents support the assessment that the United $tates continues to
lose their war on Afghanistan. The deaths of Amerikans, while providing
fuel for anti-Afghan propaganda, frightens the Amerikan public away from
participating in ground wars. It took a long 9 years to turn Amerikan
public opinion towards pulling troops out of Afghanistan, and Afghans
are still fighting to get them out.(2)
There are two incorrect bourgeois narratives underlying the reporting on
recent events. One attempts to hide the fact that the nation has faced a
brutal occupation for over a decade, as if Afghans are just irrationally
responding to the minor incident of the burning of some books. The
second narrative is that there is an outside radical religious element,
which must be distinguished from the greater Afghan nation that wants to
work with Amerikans. This narrative was used against the Taliban for
years before the invasion by U.$. troops even began. The truth being
(however flimsily) covered by both of these narratives is that the
Afghan nation has supported a decade-long war of resistance to the
imperialist occupation led by Amerika. A parallel might be drawn to the
media’s portrayal of the prison movement where the outside element is
“criminal gangs” and resistance is pinned to issues like wanting TV or
better food.
In a recent report on NPR, an official stated that USAID had to hide the
fact that they were giving aid to the Afghan people, because no one in
the country would be seen with a blanket or food with a U.$. flag on it.
This fact is a clear demonstration that either the resistance is the
Afghan people, or the “outside radical element” is so prolific as to
make distinguishing it from the Afghan people irrelevant. Meanwhile, the
funeral of an Afghan air force colonel that killed nine Amerikans was
attended by 1500 mourners last year.(3) Since this article was first
drafted another bomb struck near Bagram Air Force Base where the Korans
were burned on March 5. On March 8 the Taliban infiltrated Afghan police
in Oruzgan and killed nine of them, while six British occupiers were
killed during an attack on their vehicle in Helmand province. Our
strategic confidence comes from examples like this, where whole
countries have united to reject and fight imperialism. Comparing these
conditions to those in the United $tates demonstrates our line on where
guerrilla war is possible and not.
“Time works for the guerrilla both in the field – where it costs the
enemy a daily fortune to pursue him – and in the politico-economic
arena.”(4) The occupation of Afghanistan is estimated to have cost as
much as $500 billion(5), with sources reporting costs per Amerikan
soldier at $850,000 up to $1.2 million a year.(6) While almost all of
this money goes to U.$. corporations and their employees supplying the
soldiers, even bourgeois economists have recognized that militarism is
not a sustainable way to prop up a capitalist economy. What they fail to
acknowledge is that only a socialist economic system that produces for
need, not profit, can eliminate the inherent contradictions in
production where circulation of capital must always increase in the
interest of profit.
“There is no great novelty in [guerrilla tactics], nor can the
Marxist-Leninist camp claim any special credit for it. What is new – and
Mao is the apostle and the long Chinese revolution the first proving
ground – is the application of guerrilla activity, in a conscious and
deliberate way, to specific political objectives, without immediate
reference to the outcome of battles as such, provided only that the
revolutionaries survive.”(7)
We are coming out of a period where the universality of Maoism has been
dirtied by an association of communism with revisionists and First
Worldists. Islam continues to unite the national liberation movement in
Afghanistan, while “communism” has an association with foreign invasion.
While socialism is necessary to meet the needs of the people of
Afghanistan, the movement’s ideology so far has kept it isolated from
the toxic politics of the First World. This will work in their favor as
the people’s struggle reaches higher stages.
Here in the United $tates we must continue to find creative ways to help
the Afghans’ heroic struggle to whittle away at Amerikan support for
occupation. And we must learn from the events in Central Asia about who
are our friends and enemies, what is possible where, and what it looks
like to take on a long struggle with the confidence that you are on the
right side of history.
In early February we received a report from a family member that
Scotland Correctional Institution had been on lockdown for over 2 weeks.
All the time prisoners were getting out of their cells was 5 minutes to
shower with handcuffs. They were not allowed to use the phone to call
family, so mail has been the only form of communication.
On February 21 a North Carolina prisoner reports:
I’m on lock down for something that happened on January 19, 2012 which I
had nothing to do with. The prison placed us on an institution-wide lock
down for a small gang riot, which was handled and shut down quickly.
They still got us locked down, just trying to break our spirits.
They’ve not given any religious service, no school, no visits, no sick
calls. I placed a sick call 2 weeks ago and they still haven’t called me
in.
Grievances are not being addressed. I’m so tired of being oppressed. I
want to overcome this oppression and I know it’s a struggle.
On February 16 ULK correspondent Wolf reported:
Other closed custody facilities went back to regular operation after
Prison Emergency Response Teams (PERT) searched and stayed on each unit
for about 2 weeks. But the oppressive Karen Stanback and her assistant
Capt. Covington has continued the oppressive conditions at Scotland.
Details of this oppression include:
On 20 January 2012 we were searched by PERT at 6:30 AM. No shower,
recreation, TV, phone calls, religious services, canteen, etc. that day.
Taken to the shower on 23 January 2012 in handcuffs and made to shower
with handcuffs on. Only had 10 minutes to shower escorted by 2 COs in
handcuffs, one inmate at a time in a block of 48 people. PERT searched
us again on 25 January 2012.
After grievances and receiving complaints from family members and other
outside sources, we received 2 hours in the dayroom, 24 prisoners at a
time. During this period we must shower, make phone calls, or try to
cook or prepare a meal using 1 hot water sink in the dorm. Prisoners
must become bootlickers or snitches or their jobs are being given away
to medical custody.
All the guys who participated in the actions that occurred that night
are on segregation or were sent to long-term lockup. Still these
conditions continue to be enforced on us. Brothers don’t realize they’re
used as pawns in a dirty chess game played by this administration to
finally have a reason to bury us alive in these cemeteries. However,
Resistance Number 1, aka Wolf has entered the fight against the
oppressive imperialistic system of justice and joins MIM. We the
Resistance Number 1 realized our fight is hard and difficult, but
someone must speak out against the laboratory of injustice here at
Scotland CI.
In December 2011, the Bureau of Justice Statistics released its
annual reports on the correctional population in the United $tates.(1)
The reports cover people under adult correctional supervision in 2010.
For the second year in a row, this population declined; the first
decline since the number of people in jail and prison began growing in
the 1970s.
At the end of December 2010, the total number of people in the
correctional system, including probation, parole, prison and jail, was
7,076,200. The prison population in this country dropped .6% from 2009,
the first decline since 1972. The number of federal prisoners actually
increased by .8% but the state prison population dropped by that same
rate. Because there are more state prisoners than federal prisoners,
there was a drop overall.
The imprisonment rate for new convictions has been declining since 2007,
but this is the first year releases exceeded admissions of prisoners,
leading to the small drop in the prison population. But release rates
were down 2.9% in 2010, so these numbers don’t reflect an increase in
releases. In fact, time served by state prisoners remained about the
same.
These latest numbers may indicate that the prison population has finally
reached its peak in Amerika, possibly because of the heavy economic
burden of maintaining such a massive criminal injustice infrastructure
in this country. But even if the imprisonment rate continues to drop, it
will take many years and huge changes before it gets low enough to be
comparable to other countries. The U.$. holds over 30% of the world’s
imprisoned people and has the highest imprisonment rate in the world.(2)
The report gives two possible explanations for the drop in prison
population in the United $tates: “either a decrease in the probability
of a prison sentence, given conviction, or a decrease in the number of
convictions.” Unfortunately, data on these measures are not yet
available but either would be a good thing. However, as mentioned above,
it is likely these changes are a result of financial requirements, not a
shift in politics around imprisonment.
There are some interesting trends by nationality demonstrating a
continued commitment to national oppression by the criminal injustice
system in Amerika. Blacks and whites both had a drop in imprisonment
rates, but the decrease for whites (6.2%) was much bigger than for
Blacks (.85%). In recent years
migrants
have been the fastest growing population in U.$. prisons. While 2010
saw a 7.3% increase in the “Hispanic” imprisonment rate, non-citizens
actually saw a slight decrease, probably due to a massive increase in
deportations. Black men remain the largest sector of the prison
population and are imprisoned at a rate almost 7 times white men.
There are two specific challenges we face with our comrades who get out
of prison and want to stay politically active. First, the difficulties
of balancing work, school, politics and general home life. Second, the
overlap between friendship and politics. It is important that we address
these challenges to help our comrades follow through on their pledges to
serve the people after gaining their freedom.
So far we have been less than successful in this regard, and many
comrades fall out of touch with us, only to re-emerge when they are
locked back up months or years later. In a country with such a
relatively low number of active, committed anti-imperialists, losing
these comrades to the streets is a significant blow to our work. As we
expand our Re-Lease on Life Program, we are working to address specific
challenges with life on the streets in the belly of the beast.
Meeting Your Basic Needs
There are few resources for released prisoners, and without family or
friends to provide support it’s very difficult to find housing, get a
job and provide for basic necessities. There are few studies of
homelessness among released prisoners, but those that we’ve found
suggest that at least 10% of parolees end up on the streets without
housing after release.(1) The numbers are probably higher; sleeping on a
friend’s couch is not a long term solution but it won’t get you counted
as homeless in these studies.
Unfortunately MIM(Prisons) doesn’t currently have the resources to
provide much help in the area of basic needs for released prisoners. We
do have some resource guides for some states, and we can help you think
through the best plan for your circumstances. But our ability to help in
this area is limited. The rest of this article focuses on people who are
released and are able to meet their basic needs. If you have a release
date coming up, let us know so we can help you make a plan for the
streets.
Time Management on the Streets
Behind bars life is very regimented, with little room for any decisions
about how to organize your day, except when you are locked in your cell.
And even there, your options for how to spend your time are very
limited. You don’t have to keep a schedule because the prison keeps it
for you. So one of the problems prisoners face when they hit the street
is the vastness of opportunities and choices, and the lack of structure.
Many comrades will want to pursue some education, while also finding a
job, and attempting to reconnect with family and friends. This means a
lot of choices and opportunities, and structured days are necessary to
make them fit together. The demands of family and friends can be
especially difficult during the initial months post-release after so
long with social interactions closely monitored and limited.
Friends, family, school and work are all institutions that are deeply
ingrained in and supported by our culture. There is no support for doing
revolutionary organizing. That is why Re-Lease on Life is so important.
People have a hard enough time doing the normal things they need to do
to get by as former prisoners, especially as felons. If you just go with
the flow, you’ll find your time just flies by and you don’t put in any
political work.
To participate in the Re-Lease on Life program you need to make a
commitment to political work upon release. But most people will need to
keep this commitment minimal at first, so that you can focus on getting
established with a plan for meeting your long-term needs as an
individual, while keeping a connection to the movement.
It’s important to think about the future. If you get government
assistance, or have a part-time hustle when you get out, how long can
that last you? If you don’t have job skills or a college degree you
should consider school and look into scholarships. On the other hand, it
may be worthwhile to focus initially on just making some money before
you consider starting school.
Think about where you want to be in a year or two. If your political
work is limited by time now, how can you free up more time in the
future? One way is by getting into a career path where your income will
grow with your experience. Another consideration when looking for jobs
is, how can it support my bigger goals? If you work in food service, you
save money by bringing home leftovers. If you work at a copy shop, you
get discounts on fliers and literature. Getting a manual labor job might
help you meet your physical fitness goals. If you work at a security job
you get paid to do your political study, leaving your free time to do
outreach work.
Whatever your plan is, you need to start thinking about your time as a
budget. You have only so much each week, each day. Determine how much
you really need for the necessities in life and then schedule that time.
A week has 168 hours in it. If you sleep 8 hours a night that leaves
112. If you need 2 hours a day to cook, eat and take care of persynal
hygiene, you are down to 98 hours. Take at least 5 hours a week to deal
with other persynal stuff like finances, cleaning, and organizing. You
want to work out at least 4 hours per week, maybe more like 8. Now we
have 85 left. If you work full time you’ve got 45, plus transit time, so
make that 40. If you’re going to school too, you could probably use up
most of that 40. If you have regular appointments with your parole
officer, doctor or counselor, that will take a few hours. In your best
case scenario you might have 40 hours to spend on socializing, relaxing
and doing political work. Realistically, finding 15 to 20 hours a week
to do political work with a normal bourgeois life is an ambitious goal
that requires discipline and good planning.
Keep in mind that even if you only have 5 hours a week free for
political work, that is 5 hours of work getting done in the interests of
the oppressed. Any time you can set aside for this work is good. And
when you first hit the streets this will be easiest if you can set aside
that time on your schedule so that it is always the same day/time. For
instance, you could say that Tuesday and Thursday nights you will do
political work from 5-8 p.m. Block it off on your calendar and tell your
friends you have appointments or classes at those times (see below).
Working this into your schedule as a regular thing will make it much
easier to maintain your activism. If you give up and stop doing
political work, chances are good that you will never take it up again.
The revolution can’t afford to lose good activists like you, so don’t
let that happen!
Money is Time
Just as challenging for many former prisoners as managing time is
managing money, and the movement needs both. Don’t fall into Amerikan
consumerism. Imperialism has kept itself going by building a consumerist
culture at home to keep capital circulating. What that means is that a
typical Amerikan lifestyle involves far more consumption than is
necessary (or even healthy). Having your own apartment, your own car, a
cell phone plan, and others preparing your food for you are just some
obvious examples of things considered to be “necessary” expenses
justifying the so-called “high cost of living” in this country. Seek out
others who you can share expenses and cost-saving tips with. Extravagant
spending is often a social behavior. Many recreational things like cable
television, alcohol and cigarettes become habitual expenses. Rest and
recreation are important, but try things that are more healthy and cost
less, and if you do want to splurge, make it a special reward, not a
daily expense.
One of our strengths in this country is that Amerikans get paid
extremely high wages. By keeping expenses low, you’ll find that you can
get by on a part-time job, leaving you with more time to do what is most
important to you. Remember, even if you’re making minimum wage you are
in the top 13% income bracket in the world. Don’t use poverty as an
excuse, when your wealth and privilege are really what’s holding you
back from doing political work.
The Persynal vs. The Political
Related to the challenges you will face with managing your time on the
streets is the social demands of family and friends. The overlap between
friendship and politics is something that most people don’t consider. In
fact, in this country we are encouraged to think about politics as
something we must share with family and friends. But MIM(Prisons) does
not agree with that view.
We live in a country where most people have a very strong material
interest in the status quo, and so they will oppose anti-imperialist
politics. The chances of winning them over to the side of the revolution
are very minimal, and there is generally no need to destroy
relationships with family and friends in the name of this struggle when
there are so many other people out there we can try to recruit. Also,
because of security concerns in this country, exposing your politics to
family and friends can put you at a real risk, especially if you are on
parole. If there’s one thing you should have learned being locked up,
it’s that snitches are everywhere.
There is nothing wrong with having friends who don’t share your
political convictions, you just need to avoid talking about politics
with them or only talk about smaller points of politics, without raising
suspicion. This doesn’t mean you can’t share your political views with
friends and family who show that they are likely to be interested and
agree, but be careful because once they know your views and the work you
do, you can’t take it back.
Basics About Security on the Streets
When you are locked up in prison the government has a lot of information
about you and knows your every move. So behind bars you can only control
your security to the extent that you keep your mouth shut on the yard
and don’t share information about the political work you are doing with
people who might use it against you.
On the streets things are a little different. Although you might have to
report in to a parole officer or allow the state to track you in some
other way as a term of your release, you have a lot more freedom about
what information you do and don’t share with people and with the
government. You are under no obligation to tell anyone about the
political work you do, and in fact you should do your best to keep this
private from people you know unless you have a reason to believe that
they would be supportive. And of course you want to keep it a mystery
from the state. This is NOT because we are doing anything illegal, but
rather because the state does not like anti-imperialists and will use
this as a reason to find or create an excuse to lock you back up. So
don’t make this easy for them.
The downloadable grievance petition for Arizona has been updated to
include some more relevant addressees that were submitted by a comrade.
Please download it
here.
Click the link below for more information on this campaign.
Mail the petition to your loved ones and comrades inside who are
experiencing issues with the grievance procedure, or mandatory polygraph
testing. Send them extra copies to share! For more info on this
campaign, click
here.
Prisoners should send a copy of the signed petition to each of the
addresses below. Supporters should send letters on behalf of prisoners.
Mr. Tom Clements, Executive Director Colorado Department of
Corrections 2862 S. Circle Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80906
U.S. Department of Justice - Civil Rights Division Special Litigation
Section 950 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, PHB Washington DC 20530
Office of Inspector General HOTLINE PO Box 9778 Arlington, VA
22219
And send MIM(Prisons) copies of any responses you receive!
MIM(Prisons), USW PO Box 40799 San Francisco, CA 94140
Petition updated July 2012, October 2017, September 2018
The downloadable grievance petition for Texas has been updated to
consolidate the recipients to those who respond to prisoners, and to
comply with current Texas policies and procedures. Please download it
here.
Click the link below for more information on this campaign.
In this issue on release (ULK24), we are featuring United Playaz in San
Francisco, California, to give our comrades inside an idea of what some
formerly-imprisoned people are doing to contribute to the struggle for
peace since they’ve been out. Many staff members and volunteers with
United Playaz (UP) have spent time in the prison system. MIM(Prisons)
got the opportunity to interview one such staff-persyn, Rico, who spent
25 years in the California prison system. Rico is a
former-gangbanger-turned-peace-advocate; a lifestyle change that many
readers of Under Lock & Key can relate to.
United Playaz provides services to youth, including after-school
programs and tours inside prisons, in an attempt to pull them out of the
school-to-prison pipeline and (the potential for) violent activity,
helping them refocus on their education. UP’s mission statement reads,
United Playaz is a violence prevention and youth leadership organization
that works with San Francisco’s hardest to reach youth through case
management, street outreach, in-school services, recreational activities
at community centers, and support to incarcerated youth. United Playaz
is committed to improving the lives of young people surviving in
vulnerable environments, [who] show high incidence of truancy and low
academic performance, or have been involved in the juvenile justice
system through direct service and community collaboration. United Playaz
believes that “it takes the hood to save the hood”.
Rico explains how he first got involved with United Playaz,
In 1994 I was incarcerated at San Quentin State Prison. And at the time
Rudy [UP’s Executive Director] was bringing a bunch of troubled youth
and youth that are involved in the juvenile system and kind of just
showed them a glimpse of what’s the result of making a bad decision. And
that’s where I met Rudy. And Rudy saw me work with the kids, and then he
found out that I lived in the neighborhood that he was serving the youth
and he asked me, “When you get released I want you to check out our
program and see if you want to work with United Playaz.” So like in 2005
I finally got out after 25 years of incarceration and first I
volunteered. And then once there was an opening, a job opening, Rudy
hired me as a CRN, a community response network. It’s a job that at
night we go and do outreach, and drive around the city and just talk to
the kids that are hanging out on the street.
MIM(Prisons) asked Rico about the importance of building a United Front
for Peace in Prisons, and the challenges faced by such an endeavor.
Back in 1982 we formed a protest while I was in San Quentin. You know,
prisoners used to have rights. We had the rights to see our family when
they come see us. We had the right to get an education. We had a lot of
rights. But slowly they took that away and now they have no rights. If
you wanna get a visit, you have to work. If you don’t work, you don’t
get a visit.
So anyway the Asian, Latino, the African American, the Caucasian, we all
got together and say, “You know what? Let’s all sit down. Nobody goes to
work, nobody go to school, nothing.” And prison really depends on
prisoners. Cuz you have jobs there, that requires like maybe $35,000 a
year job, they let the prisoner do that job and get paid like $18 a
month. So they’re saving a lot of money using prisoners to run the
prison system, right? So when we sit down, when we shut down, man, they
gave us what we want and everything like back to normal and everything
smooth.
There’s always incident in the pen, like prisoners hurting each other,
but that’s a good example that when, how do you say - together we stand,
divided we fall. So you know if we are united man a lot of violence in
here will probably diminish tremendously, right? Cuz the people inside,
they’ll preach peace out here. And a lot of kids that are doing bad
behavior out here, they’re influenced by a lot of prisoners inside the
pen. But right now there’s no peace. There’s no peace. …
Well, there is [organizing for peace and unity inside prisons] but you
have to do it on the under because one thing administration, prison
administration don’t want you to do is to organize and try to bring
peace. In prison they want us to be divided. You know what I mean? So
there’s ways that we can organize but it has to be on the under.
It is ridiculous that prisoners have to discuss how to go about not
killing each other in secret, so as to not upset the prison
administrators’ paychecks! But this is not the only anti-people
development to come from the evolution of the criminal injustice system,
which is designed solely to protect capitalism and its beloved profit
motive. Rico explains some of the consequences of deciding who stays in
and who gets out in a capitalist society,
The more you treat a prisoner like an animal, when they come out they
act like animal out here. I mean one time I was in segregation unit, in
the hole. This guy he was so violent that he can’t be out in the
mainline, right? Anyway it was time for him to go. So when they let him
out, he was handcuffed out the building, across the yard, in a van,
right? And they drop him off outside. When they drop him off they just
uncuffed him, “You’re free.” How can we help someone like that, to be
out here? If he’s so violent inside that he needs to be segregated, how
can they let someone out like that? So if he commit a crime out here,
that’s gonna look bad on a lot of prisoners. And they have more power to
say, “See what happens when we release these guys out?”
But there’s guys in there that are doing better than I do - that they
can do better than what I do out here, and yet they still locked up in
the pen, because of politics. There’s a lot of em, a lot of em man. I
know some of em personally that should have been out you know and giving
back. And they can do a lot of contribution out here to bring peace. How
can we get those guys out?
Our answer to Rico’s question is that the only way to get all those guys
out, for good, is to organize for socialism and then communism. Any
reforms we make to the prison system as it is now may let some people
out, but as long as capitalism exists people will be exploited and
oppressed. This leads to resistance, both direct and indirect, and
prison is for those who don’t play by the rules. In socialism, everyone
has a role to play in society and state oppression is only used against
those who try to oppress others.
When the economic system changes to value people over profit, prisons
will also change. In China under Mao, Allyn and Adele Rickett were two
Amerikan spies in China who wrote a book titled “Prisoners of
Liberation” about their experience as prisoners of the Communist Party
of China. Their experience taught them that when prisoners have
completed self-criticism and are ready to contribute to society, they
will be released. On the other side, when prisoners are doing harm to
society (such as organizing to reinstitute a capitalist economic system)
they are not allowed to be released just because their term is up.
Instead they are encouraged to study, read, discuss, and do
self-criticism until they become productive members of society.
Anyone with a sympathetic bone in their body can tell what was going on
in China under Mao is a much more useful mode of imprisonment than what
we have at present. The difference between the liberal and MIM(Prisons)
is we know the only way to get there is through socialist revolution so
that the prison system is in the hands of those currently oppressed by
it.
Another present day challenge we discussed with UP was its goal to be
financially self-sufficient in the future. Rico explains the current
limitations that come with getting state funding,
If it’s up to us, we’re gonna go hard, and really fight for peace. But
because we’re fund[ed] by DCYF [San Francisco’s Department of Children,
Youth, & Their Families], they limit our movement. We can’t even
participate, or like rally. If there’s a Occupy rally right now, we
can’t go, cuz our organization are prevented from doing things like
that. And I think that’s important, that we’re out there with the rest
of the people that are trying to fight for change. Every year we do a
Silence the Violence Peace March. That’s okay, you know, Martin Luther
King, marches like that, we’re okay to do that. But when it’s like
budgets, and crime, and about prison, you know, rally to try to bring
those those things down, we can’t really participate. …
What’s going on outside the youth can affect them in the future if
things don’t change. And why wait til those kids get old and take em to
expose them to march and fight for your rights? You know I love to take
these young adults to a movement like that, cuz that gives em knowledge
of life, that there’s more than just hanging out on the street. But
unfortunately we’re not allowed to participate in that kind of movement.
We have learned from history that these limitations aren’t unique to
UP’s financial situation. For the non-profit in the United $tates,
similar to “aid” given to Third World countries, capitalists always
ensure their money is working in favor of their interests. This is why
one of the points of unity of the United Front for Peace in Prisons is
“Independence.” Money is too easy to come by in this country, while good
revolutionaries are too hard to find. Liberation has always been powered
by people. So we agree with Rico on the importance for striving for
autonomy.
Until then, positive steps can certainly be made within these
limitations. There are many levels to our movement and many roles to
play in building peace and unity among the lumpen. And without groups
like UP reaching the youth on the streets, efforts like the United Front
for Peace in Prisons will be too one-sided to succeed.
To close, Rico shares these words with comrades preparing for release,
The only thing I can say is that as long as you’re alive there’s hope.
And if they really want to go home, then do the right thing, regardless.
And they gotta stand up for their rights man. And they have to just try
to get along with each other and think about peace, because they are
needed out here. The experience they have in the pen, they can save a
lot of lives out here, with their younger brothers and sisters that look
for real guidance from someone who’s been there and done that. Good
luck, I hope they get out and be out here and help our system change to
a better place.
As a “free citizen” you have much greater freedom to organize on the
outside compared to in prison, even on probation or parole. Your
activism shouldn’t end with your prison term!
United Playaz 1038 Howard
Street San Francisco, CA 94103
The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of
Colorblindness by Michelle Alexander 2010, The New Press, New York
As a whole, this is a very useful book for anyone interested in
understanding the criminal injustice system. It is an excellent
aggregation of facts about every aspect of the system - incarceration,
policing, the drug war, the courts - making a scientific case that this
is really a system for social control of oppressed nations within U.$.
borders. Where Alexander falls short is in her analysis of how this fits
into society in the broader context. She doesn’t actually name national
oppression, though certainly this book is clear evidence for the
existence of something more than just an attitude of racism. She doesn’t
take on the question of why Amerikan capitalism would want such an
extensive system of prison social control. As a result, her solutions
are reformist at best.
Prisons as a Tool of National Oppression
Starting with the history of Amerikan prisons, Alexander explains how
the relatively low and stable incarceration rate in this country changed
after the civil rights movement which the government labeled criminal
and used as an excuse to “get tough on crime” and increase
incarceration.(p. 41) It was actually the revolutionary nationalist
movements of the 60s and 70s, most notably the Black Panther Party,
which terrified the Amerikan government and led to mass incarceration,
murder, brutality and infiltration to try to destroy these revolutionary
groups. Alexander’s failure to mention these movements is symptomatic of
a missing piece throughout the book - an understanding of the importance
of revolutionary nationalism.
This book does an excellent job exposing the war on drugs as a farce
that is only really concerned with social control. Although studies show
that the majority of drug users are white, 3/4 of people locked up for
drug crimes are Black or Latino.(p. 96) Further, statistics show that
violent crime rates are unrelated to imprisonment rates.(p. 99) So when
people say they are locking up “criminals” what they mean is they are
locking up people who Amerikan society has decided are “criminals” just
because of their nation of birth.
To her credit, Alexander does call out Nixon and his cronies for their
appeal to the white working class in the name of racism, under the guise
of law and order, because this group felt their privileges were
threatened.(p. 45) And she recognizes this underlying current of white
support for the criminal injustice system for a variety of reasons
related to what we call national privilege. But this book doesn’t spend
much time on the historical relations between the privileged white
nation and the oppressed nations. J. Sakai’s book Settlers: The
Mythology of the White Proletariat does a much better job of that.
Alexander argues that Amerikans, for the most part, oppose overt racial
bias. But instead we have developed a culture of covert bias that
substitutes words like “criminal” for “Black” and then discriminates
freely. This bias is what fuels the unequal policing, sentencing rates,
prison treatment, and life after release for Blacks and Latinos in
Amerika. Studies have shown that Amerikans (both Black and white) when
asked to identify or imagine a drug criminal overwhelmingly picture a
Black person.(p. 104) So although this is statistically inaccurate (they
should be picturing a white youth), this is the culture Amerika
condones. Even this thin veil over outright racism is a relatively new
development in Amerika’s long history as a pioneer in the ideology of
racism. (see
Labor
Aristocracy, Mass Base of Social Democracy by H.W. Edwards)
“More African American adults are under correctional control today - in
prison or jail, on probation or parole - than were enslaved in 1850, a
decade before the Civil War began.”(p. 175) It is this national
oppression that leads Alexander to draw the parallel that is the source
of the book’s title: prisons are the new Jim Crow. She recognizes that
prisons are not slavery, but that instead prisons are a legal way to
systematically oppress whole groups of people. While she focuses on
Blacks in this book she does note that the same conditions apply to
Latinos in this country.
The Role of the Police
Alexander addresses each aspect of the criminal injustice system,
demonstrating how it has developed into a tool to lock up Black and
Brown people. Starting with the police system she notes that the courts
have virtually eliminated Fourth Amendment protections against random
police searches, which has led to scatter shot searches. By sheer volume
yield some arrests.(p. 67) These searches are done at the discretion of
the police, who are free to discriminate in the neighborhoods they
choose to terrorize. This discretion has led to systematic searches of
people living in ghettos but no harassment of frat parties or suburban
homes and schools where statistics show the cops would actually have an
even better chance of finding drugs. In reality, when drug arrests
increase it is not a sign of increased drug activity, just an increase
in police activity.(p. 76)
Law enforcement agencies were encouraged to participate in the drug war
with huge financial incentives from the federal government as well as
equipment and training. This led to the militarization of the police in
the 1990s.(p. 74) Federal funding is directly linked to the number of
drug arrests that are made, and police were granted the right to keep
cash and assets seized in the drug war.(p. 77) These two factors
strongly rewarded police departments for their participation.
Asset seizure laws emphasize the lack of interest by the government and
police in imprisoning drug dealers or kingpins, despite drug war
propaganda claims to the contrary. Those with assets are allowed to buy
their freedom while small time users with few assets to trade are
subjected to lengthy prison terms. Alexander cites examples of payments
of $50k cutting an average of 6.3 years from a sentence in
Massachusetts.(p. 78)
Bias in the Courts
Taking on the court system, Alexander points out that most people are
not represented by adequate legal council, if they have a lawyer at all,
since the war on drugs has focused on poor people. And as a result, most
people end up pleading out rather than going to trial. The prosecution
is granted broad authority to charge people with whatever crimes they
like, and so they can make the list of charges appear to carry a long
sentence suggesting that someone would do well to accept a “lesser” plea
bargained deal, even if the likelihood of getting a conviction on some
of the charges is very low.
“The critical point is that thousands of people are swept into the
criminal justice system every year pursuant to the drug war without much
regard for their guilt or innocence. The police are allowed by the
courts to conduct fishing expeditions for drugs on streets and freeways
based on nothing more than a hunch. Homes may be searched for drugs
based on a tip from an unreliable, confidential informant who is trading
the information for money or to escape prison time. And once swept
inside the system, people are often denied attorneys or meaningful
representation and pressured into plea bargains by the threat of
unbelievably harsh sentences - sentences for minor drug crimes that are
higher than many countries impose on convicted murderers.”(p. 88)
After allowing discretion in areas that ensure biased arrests, trials
and sentences, the courts shut off any ability for people to challenge
inherent racial bias in the system. The Supreme Court ruled that there
must be overt statements by the prosecutor or jury to consider racial
bias under the constitution. But prosecutorial discretion leads to
disproportionate treatment of cases by race.
Further discretion in dismissing jurors, selective policing, and
sentencing all lead to systematically different treatment for Blacks and
Latinos relative to whites. This can be demonstrated easily enough with
a look at the numbers. Sophisticated studies controlling for all other
possible variables consistently show this bias. But a 2001 Supreme Court
ruling determined that racial profiling cases can only be initiated by
the government. “The legal rules adopted by the Supreme Court guarantee
that those who find themselves locked up and permanently locked out due
to the drug war are overwhelmingly black and brown.”(p. 136)
Release from Prison but a Lifetime of Oppression
This book goes beyond the system of incarceration to look at the impact
on prisoners who are released as well as on their families and
communities. Alexander paints a picture that is fundamentally
devastating to the Black community.
She outlines how housing discrimination against former felons prevents
them from getting Section 8 housing when this is a group most likely to
be in need of housing assistance. Public housing can reject applicants
based on arrests even if there was no conviction. This lack of
subsidized or publicly funded housing is compounded by the
unavailability of jobs to people convicted of crimes, as a common
question on job applications is used to reject these folks. “Nearly
one-third of young black men in the United States today are out of work.
The jobless rate for young black male dropouts, including those
incarcerated, is a staggering 65 percent.”(p. 149)
“Nationwide, nearly seven out of eight people living in high-poverty
urban areas are members of a minority group.”(p. 191) A standard
condition of parole is a promise not to associate with felons, a virtual
impossibility when released back into a community that is riddled with
former felons.
“Today a criminal freed from prison has scarcely more rights, and
arguably less respect, than a freed slave or a black person living
‘free’ in Mississippi at the height of Jim Crow. Those released from
prison on parole can be stopped and searched by the police for any
reason - or no reason at all - and returned to prison for the most minor
of infractions, such as failing to attend a meeting with a parole
officer. Even when released from the system’s formal control, the stigma
of criminality lingers. Police supervision, monitoring, and harassment
are facts of life not only for those labeled criminals, but for all
those who ‘look like’ criminals. Lynch mobs may be long gone, but the
threat of police violence is ever present…The ‘whites only’ signs may be
gone, but new signs have gone up - notices placed in job applications,
rental agreements, loan applications, forms for welfare benefits, school
applications, and petitions for licenses, informing the general public
that ‘felons’ are not wanted here. A criminal record today authorizes
precisely the forms of discrimination we supposedly left behind -
discrimination in employment, housing, education, public benefits, and
jury service. Those labeled criminals can even be denied the right to
vote.”(p. 138)
Alexander devotes a number of pages to the issue of voting and the
prohibition in all but two states on prisoners voting while incarcerated
for a felony offense, and the further denial of the vote to prisoners
released on parole. Some states even take away prisoners’ right to vote
for life. She is right that this is a fundamental point of
disenfranchisement, but Alexander suggests that “a large number of close
elections would have come out differently if felons had been allowed to
vote…”(p. 156) This may be true, but those differences would not have
had a significant impact on the politics in Amerika. This is because
elections
in an imperialist country are just an exercise in choosing between
figureheads. The supposedly more liberal Democrats like Clinton and
Obama
were the ones who expanded the criminal injustice system the most. So a
different imperialist winning an election would not change the system.
Oppressed Nation Culture
On the Amerikan culture and treatment of oppressed peoples Alexander
asks: “…are we wiling to demonize a population, declare a war against
them, and then stand back and heap shame and contempt upon them for
failing to behave like model citizens while under attack?”(p. 165) She
argues that the culture of the oppressed is an inevitable result of the
conditions faced by the oppressed. And in fact the creation of lumpen
organizations for support is a reasonable outcome.
“So herein lies the paradox and predicament of young black men labeled
criminals. A war has been declared on them, and they have been rounded
up for engaging in precisely the same crimes that go largely ignored in
middle and upper class white communities - possession and sale of
illegal drugs. For those residing in ghetto communities, employment is
scarce - often nonexistent. Schools located in ghetto communities more
closely resemble prisons than places of learning, creativity, or moral
development. …many fathers are in prison, and those who are ‘free’ bear
the prison label. They are often unable to provide for, or meaningfully
contribute to, a family. And we wonder, then, that many youth embrace
their stigmatized identity as a means of survival in this new caste
system? Should we be shocked when they turn to gangs or fellow inmates
for support when no viable family support structure exists? After all,
in many respects, they are simply doing what black people did during the
Jim Crow era - they are turning to each other for support and solace in
a society that despises them.
“Yet when these young people do what all severely stigmatized groups do
- try to cope by turning to each other and embracing their stigma in a
desperate effort to regain some measure of self esteem - we, as a
society, heap more shame and contempt upon them. We tell them their
friends are ‘no good’, that they will ‘amount to nothing,’ that they are
‘wasting their lives,’ and that ‘they’re nothing but criminals.’ We
condemn their baggy pants (a fashion trend that mimics prison-issue
pants) and the music that glorifies a life many feel they cannot avoid.
When we are done shaming them, we throw up our hands and then turn out
backs as they are carted off to jail.”(p167)
National Oppression
Alexander would do well to consider the difference between racism, an
attitude, and national oppression, a system inherent to imperialist
economics. Essentially she is describing national oppression when she
talks about systematic racism. But by missing this key concept,
Alexander is able to sidestep a discussion about national liberation
from imperialism.
“When the system of mass incarceration collapses (and if history is any
guide, it will), historians will undoubtedly look back and marvel that
such an extraordinarily comprehensive system of racialized social
control existed in the United States. How fascinating, they will likely
say, that a drug war was waged almost exclusively against poor people of
color - people already trapped in ghettos that lacked jobs and decent
schools. They were rounded up by the millions, packed away in prisons,
and when released they were stigmatized for life, denied the right to
vote, and ushered into a world of discrimination. Legally barred from
employment, housing, and welfare benefits - and saddled with thousands
of dollars of debt - the people were shamed and condemned for failing to
hold together their families. They were chastised for succumbing to
depression and anger, and blamed for landing back in prison. Historians
will likely wonder how we could describe the new caste system as a
system of crime control, when it is difficult to imagine a system better
designed to create - rather than prevent - crime.”(p. 170)
Alexander does an excellent job describing the system of national
oppression in the United $tates. She notes “One way of understanding our
current system of mass incarceration is to think of it as a birdcage
with a locked door. It is a set of structural arrangements that locks a
racially distinct group into a subordinate political, social and
economic position, effectively creating a second-class citizenship.
Those trapped within the system are not merely disadvantaged, in the
sense that they are competing on an unequal playing field or face
additional hurdles to political or economic success; rather, the system
itself is structured to lock them into a subordinate position.”(p. 180)
The book explains that the arrest and lock up of a few whites is just
part of the latest system of national oppression or “the New Jim Crow”:
“[T]he inclusion of some whites in the system of control is essential to
preserving the image of a colorblind criminal justice system and
maintaining our self-image as fair and unbiased people.”(p. 199)
One interesting conclusion by Alexander is the potential for mass
genocide inherent in the Amerikan prison system. There really is no need
for the poor Black workers in factories in this country any longer so
this population has truly become disposable and can be locked away en
masse without any negative impact to the capitalists (in fact there are
some positive impacts to these government subsidized
industries).(p. 208) It’s not a big leap from here to genocide.
Economics for Blacks have worsened even as they improved for whites. “As
unemployment rates sank to historically low levels in the late 1990s for
the general population, joblessness rates among non-college black men in
their twenties rose to their highest levels ever, propelled by
skyrocketing incarceration rates.”(p. 216) She points out poverty and
unemployment stats do not include people in prison. This could
underestimate the true jobless rate by as much as 24% for less-educated
black men.(p. 216)
Unfortunately, in her discussion of what she calls “structural racism”
Alexander falls short. She recognizes white privilege and the
reactionary attitudes of the white nation, acknowledging that “working
class” whites support both current and past racism, but she does not
investigate why this is so. Attempting to explain the systematic racism
in Amerikan society Alexander ignores national oppression and ends up
with a less than clear picture of the history and material basis of
white nation privilege and oppressed nation oppression within U.$.
borders. National oppression is the reason why these oppressive
institutions of slavery, Jim Crow, and imprisonment keep coming back in
different forms in the U.$., and national liberation is the only
solution.
How to Change the System
Alexander highlights the economic consequences of cutting prisons which
show the strong financial investment that Amerikans have overall in this
system: “If four out of five people were released from prison, far more
than a million people could lose their jobs.”(p. 218) This estimation
doesn’t include the private sector: private prisons, manufacturers of
police and guard weapons, etc.
To her credit, Alexander understands that small reformist attacks on the
criminal injustice system won’t put an end to the systematic oppression:
“A civil war had to be waged to end slavery; a mass movement was
necessary to bring a formal end to Jim Crow. Those who imagine that far
less is required to dismantle mass incarceration and build a new,
egalitarian racial consensus reflecting a compassionate rather than
punitive impulse towards poor people of color fail to appreciate the
distance between Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream and the ongoing racial
nightmare for those locked up and locked out of American
society.”(p. 223)
The problem with this analysis is that it fails to extrapolate what’s
really necessary to make change sufficient to create an egalitarian
society. In fact, these very examples demonstrate the ability of the
Amerikan imperialists to adapt and change their approach to national
oppression: slavery, Jim Crow, mass incarceration. Alexander seems to
see this when she talks about what will happen if the movement to end
mass incarceration doesn’t address race: “Inevitably a new system of
racialized social control will emerge - one that we cannot foresee, just
as the current system of mass incarceration was not predicted by anyone
thirty years ago.”(p. 245) But she stops short of offering any useful
solutions to “address race” in this fight.
Alexander argues that affirmative action and the token advancement of a
few Blacks has served as a racial bribe rather than progress, getting
them to abandon more radical change.(p. 232) She concludes that the
Black middle class is a product of affirmative action and would
disappear without it.(p. 234) “Whereas black success stories undermined
the logic of Jim Crow, they actually reinforce the system of mass
incarceration. Mass incarceration depends for its legitimacy on the
widespread belief that all those who appear trapped at the bottom
actually chose their fate.”(p. 235)
This is a good point: successful reformism often ends with a few token
bribes in an attempt to stop a movement from making greater demands. And
this is not really success. But short of revolution, there is no way to
successfully end national oppression. And so Alexander’s book concludes
on a weak note as she tries to effect a bold and radical tone and
suggest drastic steps are needed but offers no concrete suggestions
about what these steps should be. She ends up criticizing everything
from affirmative action to Obama but then pulling back and apologizing
for these same institutions and individuals. This is the hole that
reformists are stuck in once they see the mess that is the imperialist
Amerikan system.
It’s not impossible to imagine circumstances under which the Amerikan
imperialists would want to integrate the oppressed nations within U.$.
borders into white nation privilege. This could be advantageous to keep
the home country population entirely pacified and allow the imperialists
to focus on plunder and terrorism in the Third World. But we would not
consider this a success for the oppressed peoples of the world.
A progressive movement against national oppression within U.$. borders
must fight alongside the oppressed nations of the world who face even
worse conditions at the hands of Amerikan imperialism. These Third World
peoples may not face mass incarceration, but they suffer from short
lifespans due to hunger and preventable diseases as well as the
ever-present threat of death at the hands of Amerikan militarism making
the world safe for capitalist plunder.