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.
This memoir by Piper Kerman, describes the experience of a well-off
white womyn who served a year in a minimum-security Federal prison in
Danbury, Connecticut. Kernan was locked up for drug trafficking and
money laundering, crimes she committed 10 years before her conviction
and self-surrender. This is not a story of the typical imprisonment of
disadvantaged men and wimmin, disproportionately poor and from oppressed
nations, but rather a memoir of a woman with a solid future who took a
brief detour to prison and made a lot of money by writing a book about
it. Most prisoners face a life after release haunted by their conviction
which makes finding housing and jobs virtually impossible. While others
in prison on her charges are labeled drug dealers and face long
sentences, Kernan’s brief imprisonment is portrayed as the result of a
period of reckless experimentation and mistakes of her youth.
Ordinarily a book like this wouldn’t hold much interest for
MIM(Prisons), but it’s become quite a sensation after it was the basis
for a popular Netflix TV series by the same name. This reviewer has only
seen a few episodes of the TV show, but based on that i can say it’s
only loosely based on the book. For instance, where the book has
virtually no sex at all, the TV show is mostly sex and lots of
sensationalism. The reality of boredom and mundane prison life wouldn’t
make for a very interesting TV show.
On the positive side, Kernan humanizes the wimmin who she meets in
prison, and gives their lives voice by pointing out the unjust drug
sentences and devastating effects prison has on families. The TV show
also provides a human face to its characters, when they aren’t having
sex or acting in some stereotypical role, but given the general
portrayal of prisoners as evil and dangerous this is at least a small
improvement. Of course, none of those wimmin get book deals, and for the
most part they also don’t have jobs lined up, or homes in New York
bought by fiancées who visit religiously every week, along with hoards
of other people who visit and write throughout their imprisonment.
Kernan does admit her volume of mail greatly exceeds everyone else. And
she spends a few pages reflecting on the fact that some wimminn she
meets face lives on the outside just as difficult as their lives behind
bars.
Part of humanizing the wimmin in Danbury’s Federal Correctional
Institution includes telling stories of their kindness towards fellow
prisoners. In this regard the TV show overplays violence and conflict
between the prisoners relative to the book. Kernan explains the deep
friendships and support the wimmin offer each other in this minimum
security prison, and overall she sees their humynity and does not try to
portray Amerikan prisons as a place that is offering any rehabilitation
or value for prisoners.
Both the book and the TV show condemn the prison guards for their
brutality and degradation of the prisoners. The reality of Kernan’s
experience in the book does describe some guards who clearly enjoy their
sadistic power, and overall she maintains a strong anti-pig position
even when someone is cutting her a break.
Overall this book doesn’t contribute much to those seeking to understand
the conditions in prison and fight the criminal injustice system. It
advances the finances and career of one well-off white womyn, and if
anything we learn that prisons are built to lock up poor people, mostly
from oppressed nations, and imprisonment of people like Kernan is a
fluke that rarely happens and registers little damage to their lives.
July 1, Murrieta, California - Residents of this southern California
town blocked three buses carrying about 140 detained migrants from
Central America from entering their town. The buses were diverted to
other border patrol facilities for processing and supervised release
pending appearance in immigration court. These flag waving Amerikans
spouted racist slogans about the destruction of Amerika brought by these
“illegal” additions to their precious white community as they attacked
the buses. The migrants crossed the border in Texas and were flown to
California to relieve the overcrowded processing facilities in Texas by
the Department of Homeland Security.
The protests were instigated by Murrieta Mayor Alan Long who called on
residents to oppose the federal government’s decision to move the
migrants to the facility in his city. He wants the federal government to
deport these migrants immediately. The Obama administration responded to
the outcry by promising to cut back on the “illegal” border crossings,
attempting to get $2 billion from Congress and authority to return
people home faster.(1)
Already this year Border Patrol agents have detained more than 52,000
unaccompanied minors crossing the U.$. border.(2) But in spite of the
media reports, this isn’t just about children migrants, and we do not
believe that activists should attempt to stir up public sympathy by
focusing on the children. The U.$. border is an artificial restriction,
put in place to protect imperialist wealth from those people who create
the wealth. Migrants cross the U.$. border to escape U.$.-backed militia
violence, capitalist-corporate economic devastation, brutal regimes and
devastating poverty. These are all conditions that secure cheap labor
for exploitation by imperialist corporations which bring the wealth home
to Amerika and protect it with militarized borders. The border crossers
of all ages deserve access to this wealth more than the well-off
residents of Murrieta. Anti-imperialists call for open borders, and
support the rights of indigenous people everywhere to enforce
immigration restrictions on the imperialists who invade and steal their
land and resources.
Revolutionary Ecology (RE) is a new website that appeared in 2014.
We welcome its appearance as the Maoist movement is in great need of a
dedicated cell to address our current ecological crisis. We promote a
cell structure for the Maoist movement in the First World, with cells
focused on specific projects or localities. MIM(Prisons) is a cell
focused on the U.$. prison system. We need a cell (or cells) that are
focused on the struggle against the destruction of our environment just
as badly. As the RE comrades point out in many articles, these are
problems of dire urgency. They are also problems that threaten First
World youth directly, potentially connecting them to the interests of
the majority of humynity. This website is a good addition to the arsenal
of educational tools for communists working to build a movement to
overthrow imperialism.
The organizers of RE describe it as “a collaborative project that seeks
to popularize Marxism within the environmentalist and animal liberation
movements.” They go on to explain: “We are quite literally faced with
two options: Communism or annihilation.” In the article,
“What
Would Socialism Mean for the Environment”, this is further
explained: “Whereas capitalism involves productive relations of
exploitation sustained toward the circular end of profit, socialism
involves the democratic control over the means of production as part of
the rational and increasingly egalitarian satisfaction of people’s wants
and needs. Implied in such rational and democratic production is the
inclusion of ecological regeneration and co-dependence as regulative
economic principles.” In other words, instead of relying on the almighty
invisible hand, socialism is about humynity taking conscious control of
our collective destiny and organizing ourselves in a way to best serve
the interests of all humynity. As should be obvious by now, these
interests overlap greatly with preserving the natural systems that we
live in and depend on.
The article “Capitalism’s Steady March Towards Irreversible Ecological
Tipping Points” describes how capitalism is moving humynity rapidly
towards tipping points that will be devastating for the Earth, including
the deforestation of the Amazon, while discussing the inability of
single issue groups and government regulations to stop this process.
Much of the website’s content brings Marxist analysis into the
ecological discussion, as with the article “Lake Michigan Oil Spill:
Capitalism and Nature” which explains the role of commodities and money
in the context of humyn’s relations with nature. And we are reminded of
the importance of internationalism in the revolutionary ecology struggle
through articles about South African trade unions and First Nations,
among others.
In response to the Deep Ecology platform, one article proposes a
Revolutionary Ecology Platform:
The well-being and flourishing of human and non-human life are
intimately related. The flourishing of non-human life is generally of
direct and indirect utility to humans, and vice versa.
Richness and diversity of non-human life can contribute to utility for
humanity at large. Thus, it should be promoted as such.
Real wealth is utility or the ability to satisfy human wants and needs.
The source of all wealth is two-fold: nature and human labor. It is in
the long-term interest of a majority of humanity to steward biodiversity
and ecological well-being (along with other elements of nature).
Alienation from and the subjugation of nature is in the vital interest
of a small proportion of humanity: the ruling classes. Increasingly
under capitalist-imperialism, less real wealth (i.e., human utility) is
produced in proportion to overall economic activity and at greater cost
to human and non-human life.
Ecologically unsustainable economic activity is inherent to
capitalist-imperialism, whereby economic activity must expand even as
much of it is tertiary and adds no real wealth in terms of the
satisfying basic wants and needs.[sic] Abolishing such parasitic
economic activity and reassigning it to restoring the natural element of
wealth would aid in re-establishing the basic link between human and
non-human life and provide for the flourishing of both.
The whole structure of society needs to be changed. Only revolution –
the seizure of power away from one set of classes by another – can
create the necessary conditions for such a transformation. Any such
revolution, if it is to be successful, must advance the interests of the
most exploited and oppressed sections of humanity, not merely the
privileged subjects of neo-colonial imperialism.
A total ideological change of reconnection between human and non-human
life will not fully take place until the basic structure of society
(i.e. the mode of production) has been transformed into one of
democratically producing long-term utility instead of profit.
Nonetheless, the ideological sphere and subjective forces are a leading
variable component where class struggle is carried out.
Those who adhere to the above points must get organized to make
revolution possible.
Point 5 is of particular importance for drawing the logical connections
between Maoism and ecology. Many in the First World who are concerned
about ecology are disgusted by the over-consumption of their peers. One
example of the extremes this takes in rich countries has been
circulating on the internet recently, exposing Amerikans in rural areas
who are customizing their big diesel trucks to be less fuel efficient
and spew out more pollution, while these excessive polluters are
explicitly ridiculing and targeting people who drive more fuel efficient
cars. While this is one example of the labor aristocracy taking
capitalist values to ridiculous extremes, it is not the individual
decisions of the consumer class that fuel the destruction of the natural
world. Car culture was built by capitalist planners who developed and
marketed suburbs and lobbied for state-sponsored roads. The focus on
GDP, the stock market, and other economic indicators are an obsession in
the First World that the majority have joined in on, with no thought to
the fact that consumption must be reduced in First World countries in
the creation of an ecologically sustainable system. But it is not the
rural truck drivers who are the biggest obstacle to change, it is the
very logic of capitalism itself, which requires ever-expanding
production, markets and circulation. This system is backed up by the
biggest, most ruthless militaries in the world today.
Nikolai Brown touches on over-production within capitalism in
h
article on e-waste, “Not only does the inherent focus on the
realization of surplus value engender ‘planned obsolescence,’ a global
division of labor enables the flow of resources necessary for the
propagation of disposable electronics. True to the fashion of
capitalism, by producing toxic e-waste on such a widespread basis, its
two requisites, labor-power and the natural environment, are
increasingly degraded.”(1) This article introduces us to the concept of
ecological unequal exchange: “the transfer of natural resources
to the First World from the Third World, and the return of pollution and
waste to Third from the First World.” As ecological crises advance, this
is a concept that deserves much attention in connection to the economic
unequal exchange that occurs under imperialism.
While we don’t
have any fundamental disagreements with the principles proposed by RE
above, we find their discussion of Deep Ecology idealist in its critique
of Maoism’s (and other socialist countries’) environmental history. The
article “Deep Green Maoism?” criticizes the history of socialism for its
record on “environmental degradation and species destruction” without
offering concrete facts on what is being critiqued. No doubt all
socialist societies to date, including the Maoist countries, had much
room for improvement around environmental protection. But we should not
issue blanket critiques from a position of hindsight and idealism. For
their day the Maoists advanced the environmental movement further than
any previous struggle by overthrowing imperialism and building a society
that aimed to put an end to oppression of people. In the process they
set the masses free to solve farming sustainability problems creatively,
and develop both farming and industry to more efficiently meet the needs
of the people. These are critical first steps towards living
harmoniously with the environment. And we can assume that as dialectical
materialists, these socialists would have continued to improve and build
an understanding and practice regarding the importance of environmental
preservation, had those societies not been taken over by bourgeois
elements from within the party.
One of the first things we try to teach to new comrades is the
difference between idealism and materialism, and that materialism means
comparing actual practices. When we compare Chinese socialism to the
Soviet Union we see improvements in the overall political approach,
which translated into better science and ecology. And when we compare
both socialist countries to the capitalist countries, the socialists
were industrializing in ways that were much friendlier to humyn workers
and the rest of the environment. While we cannot make a comprehensive
comparison here, we will provide some large-scale examples that indicate
the advances of these real world examples of socialism over what was
happening in capitalist countries at the time (and even today).
One Amerikan correspondent in the Soviet Union wrote in 1942, “Moscow
has also the most scientific garbage disposal in the world. All the
waste of this great city of more than 4,000,000 people is first used in
‘biothermal processes’ which heat large ‘greenhouse farms’ from
underground. When the garbage and sewage is thoroughly rotted in this
quite odorless manner, it is then used as a fertilizer for ordinary
farming. This amazing development got no advertising whatever. I merely
chanced upon it when I visited a farm.”(2) Decades later in northern
China, “cadres, peasants, workers, and technicians experimented for ten
years with utilizing industrial waste waters. Now the city’s daily
400,000 tons of sewage is processed to fertilize and irrigate 12,930
hectares of farmland. … Reciprocally, agricultural wastes such as
cottonseed shells, corncobs, sugar-cane residue, and animal viscera
become raw materials for developing commune-owned industries. …
Decentralization and multipurpose use of wastes have, besides
integrating industry and agriculture, been used to control industrial
pollution. Like the relocation of factories, pollution control is
generally coordinated on the local level.”(3)
Local, self-sufficient agricultural production was a key to successful
socialist development in Mao’s opinion. This had more to do with class
and economics, but reinforced and enabled ecologically sustainable
practices. In discussing the balance between the foreign and native and
the large, medium and small scale production, Mao wrote, “At the present
time we have not proposed chemicalization of agriculture. One reason is
that we do not expect to be able to produce much fertilizer in the next
however many years. (And the little we have is concentrated on our
industrial crops.) Another reason is that if the turn to chemicals is
proposed everybody will focus on that and neglect pig breeding.
Inorganic fertilizers are also needed but they have to be combined with
organic; alone they harden the soil.” (4) Aside from pigs, humanure (or
“night soil” as they called it) was a major source of organic fertilizer
that utilized local resources on hand while simultaneously dealing with
the problem of humyn “waste” similar to the Soviet example above. The
safe and efficient use of humanure was greatly accelerated under
socialism. Under capitalism, in 2014, this resource is disposed of as a
waste, and the movement away from synthetic fertilizers and pesticides
is still very small.(5)
Guided by the popularization of the scientific method to serve
production, the Chinese also developed bacterial fertilizers at the
local level. This is something that has gained a lot of attention in
India in recent decades as the problems of over-dependence on synthetic
fertilizers are becoming more pronounced. A report by Science for the
People from 1974 describes the process of culturing the fertilizer,
which is “reported to help crops absorb nitrogen, to protect them
against more than thirty-two bacterial diseases, and to promote speedier
seed germination and a shorter growing period.” The report states that,
“Such small factories producing microbial products seem now to be common
in the Chinese countryside.” They report on the process by which this
commune studied bacterial fertilizers and has since taught it to about
20 other communes. “Similar processes of face-to-face contact and
exchange appear to be exceedingly important in the transmission and
popularization of science in China. Because such exchange generates
little or no printed material, western observers, who tend to believe
that all scientific communication of any note eventually reaches print,
are likely to overlook what appears to be a vast network of informal
scientific exchange in the Chinese countryside.”(6)
An author on revolutionaryecology.com argues that “…the environmental
problems associated with the first world-wide wave of socialism were due
to a lack of foresight and scientific knowledge about ecology, holdover
culture from capitalism and semi-feudalism, and the partial impact of
the theory of the productive forces.” The socialists of the 1900s had
only as much foresight and scientific knowledge as existed at that time,
and holding them to the standards of knowledge available today is
idealism. Further, we know that the Maoists aggressively attacked the
theory of productive forces and undertook the Cultural Revolution to
fight capitalist culture. Sure, once these battles were won the
revolution in all aspects would advance further, but this is not a basis
for a 20/20 hindsight critique of the Maoist environmental practice in
the socialist countries of the mid-1900s. We know that some practices in
Maoist China would not be undertaken today, with the current state of
the environment and the knowledge we have of effects of these practices.
But that does not constitute reason for this critique any more than we
would criticize China for failing to use computers to advance socialism
before computers were available.
The article argues further “…it is this same understanding on the unity
between people and nature which was either missing or gravely misapplied
during the socialism of the last century.” Socialism “neglected to treat
nature as part of and necessary to people. That is not to say that
socialism treated the natural world and other species in terms other
than of humyn utility, but that it did so in an often ill-conceived and
short-sighted manner.” Here again we ask for concrete examples of
socialism’s failure in this regard, which should have been corrected
based on information available at the time. In farming areas the
communes in China were acutely aware of their dependence on nature as
essential for survival.
The article goes on to say: “In short,
an ecologically informed Maoism offers the chance to build a ‘socialism
of a new type’ for the 21st century which seeks to resolve the
contradiction between people and their natural environment as much as
the contradictions between people themselves.” As humynity’s ecological
understanding expands, socialism will utilize this knowledge and it will
do so without the barriers presented by capitalism. Humyn knowledge and
scientific understanding is constantly expanding. We find it misleading
to say that “a new type” of socialism is needed to address ecological
problems.
Aside from these Revolutionary Ecology Platform issues, we have a few
smaller disagreements with the website. First there is a question of
setting a bad security example by including a Facebook plugin so that
people can “like” the website via their persynal Facebook accounts. This
means the website is pushing people to expose themselves publicly as
supporting RE. Unfortunately, this is information now available to the
state, and individuals who may be new to activism (plus some blissfully
ignorant experienced folks) will think they are helping the movement by
“liking” the website only to expose themselves as targets for state
repression just as they deepen their political line and involvement.
Even at the level of random readers, we should always promote good
security practices, both as a point of keeping our comrades safe and as
an educational point about the repression the so-called democratic state
of Amerika will unleash against those who threaten the imperialist
system.
RE does not provide much information for readers on how to get involved.
They do solicit participation of writers for the website, and the site
links to other websites that are generally anti-imperialist and/or
Maoist, or have good resources for Maoists (Kersplebedeb), and some of
these other websites provide a forum for broader activism. But as a
friendly suggestion we’d encourage the organizers of RE to make it
easier for newly interested readers to take some anti-imperialist action
if they don’t want to become writers for the site. Ecology is an
appealing topic for white youth, and more must be done to pull those
serious about real solutions to environmental destruction into the
revolutionary movement. We look forward to more ecologists stepping up
to build a powerful and active revolutionary ecology organization.
The Texa$ Board of Criminal (in)Justice implemented new prisoner
Correspondence Rules on 1 October 2013 restricting indigent prisoners to
5 one-ounce domestic letters per month. The previous policy allowed 5
letters per week. This is a clear attack on prisoners’ access to the
outside world, and in particular
impacts
politically active prisoners who use the mail to expose the
brutality and abuse going on behind bars in Texas. In response to this
new policy United Struggle from Within initiated a
grievance
campaign, organizing prisoners to appeal this restriction. Below are
several new updates to the campaign:
Successful Grievance Against Limits on Legal Mail
From Hughes Unit: “I won my grievance due to interference from the
department law library which deals with offenders who are indigent. They
were saying five letters a month for everything and they were trying to
stop my legal mail from going out to the courts. There is no limit on
legal mail! They were also trying only to give us supplies like 25
sheets of paper, one pen, five envelopes a month. But an indigent
offender who is doing legal work can have this once a week, and mail out
as much legal work he or she wants.”
One prisoner from Allred wrote Step 1 and Step 2 grievances requesting
additional stamps. Because of his need to use his 5 indigent mail stamps
to pursue legal research this prisoner was unable to write to family and
friends and so requested additional stamps from the Warden. The first
request prior to the grievances stated “I need to mail 5 more letters
this month using indigent [mail]. … This unit law library is giving me
the run around having me write and ask everybody under the sun. They
don’t know about the 83rd Legislature House Bill 634 by Farias of Texas.
It’s the holidays, I need extra 5 letters this month.” The response from
the Warden: “That doesn’t meet any legal requirement and I don’t have
the authority to allow you extra postage for that.” Responses to his
grievances following up on the Warden’s denial included denying the Step
1 for “excessive attachments.” The attachments were copies of his
initial attempts to resolve the issue without filing a grievance.
Based on the victory from the prisoner in Hughes Unit, we encourage
prisoners to appeal their access to stamps for legal mail separately
from the restriction on personal mail.
Restrictions on Receipt of Stationary
A comrade in Eastham Unit reported: “Each year the big wigs running
Texas prisons decide on what to take from the prisoners next. This year
it involves indigent mail and stationary sent in from the outside.
Prisoners who have no money on their trust fund account are able to
receive supplies (paper, pen, envelopes) and send out letters through
the indigent mail. Before this March prisoners could send out five
letters a week, now it’s just five letters a month… What’s worse is that
we’re charged for indigent mail services. Whenever we get money on our
account, the cost for every letter mailed and each supply is deducted.
“Prior to March our friends and family could have stationary from an
outside store sent to us. This was eliminated, and now our only option
is purchasing stationary from commissary, and paying their prices. Like
any oppressor, TDCJ enjoys coming up with new ideas and ways to make
life more difficult for their captors. There’s strength in numbers. The
more of us who write grievances, send letters to state politicians, and
get the word out to our family and friends, the better chance we have of
telling our oppressors that we’re not going to take this lying down.”
This comrade is right on about the strength in numbers. We have a number
of prisoners across the state working on this campaign to end the
restrictions on correspondence in Texas, and we’ve come up with a few
key
steps for prisoners and supporters to take.
Some jailhouse lawyers have created guides to fighting this injustice as
well as a broader
grievance
guide for Texas, and we are seeing an influx of prisoners requesting
these resources. We look forward to the results of this growing activism
in this state with the largest prison population and one of the highest
incarceration rates in the country.
For this indigent mail campaign in particular, we have a sample step 1
grievance for prisoners to use as well as a sample step 2 grievance for
those whose step 1 is rejected. Write to us for a copy of the indigent
mail campaign guide.
April 22 - The U.$. Supreme Court upheld a Michigan ban on affirmative
action in admission decisions to public universities, a final decision
that reinforces national oppression in education from grade school
through college. The majority opinion of the court upheld the state law
that was enacted by Michigan voters in 2006. In addition to Michigan,
seven other states have enacted similar bans: California, Florida,
Washington, Arizona, Nebraska, Oklahoma and New Hampshire.(1)
The Supreme Court couched their ruling in arguments about upholding
democracy: “It is demeaning to the democratic process to presume that
the voters are not capable of deciding an issue of this sensitivity on
decent and rational grounds,” justice Kennedy explained in the majority
decision.(1) This faith in the capability of the voters in Amerika is
only correct if we seek to reinforce white supremacy. 76% of Michigan’s
population is white, and Amerikan capitalism promotes individualism and
self-interest, so we should expect this population to vote in their own
persynal interests, which rest on national oppression. “Decent and
rational grounds” cannot be found as the basis for banning a practice of
affirmative action that attempts to address the unequal access to
educational opportunities offered oppressed nation youth in the United
$tates.
As we explained in 2012 when a lower court ruling was issued on this
case, bans on affirmative action are fundamentally reactionary in that
they preserve white privilege, but
overall
affirmative action itself has failed oppressed nation youth.
Affirmative action does not address the fundamental inequalities faced
by oppressed nations within U.$. borders, it’s just an attempt to deal
with the effects of these inequalities in young adults. As we wrote in
that article: “The achievement gap between Black and white children went
down between the Brown v Board of Education ruling and the late
1980s. But it started to grow again in the early 1990s. By 2005, in
about half the high schools (those with the largest concentration of
Blacks and Latinos) in the 100 largest districts in the country less
than half the students entering the schools in ninth grade were
graduating high school. Between 1993 and 2002 the number of high schools
with this problem increased by 75%. These numbers, not surprisingly,
coincide with a drop in Black and Latino enrollment in public
universities.”(1)
The affirmative action debate highlights the ongoing existence of
national oppression within U.$. borders. And it underscores the
intersection of class and nation, keeping a sizable portion of New
Afrikans and Latinos without a high school diploma and unable to take
advantage of affirmative action in college admission even where it still
exists. This goes back to the way that public education is funded in the
United $tates, through property taxes, ensuring that poor neighborhoods
will have lower quality education and denying kids from those
neighborhoods the opportunities availabile to kids from wealthier
neighborhoods. This economic segregation is tied to national
segregation, creating a cycle of poverty that reinforces national
oppression within this wealthy imperialist country.
The debate over affirmative action at the college level gets at the core
of what equality is. Those who demand “blind” admissions practices have
to pretend that everyone applying for college admissions had equal
opportunities up to the point of college application. And this gives us
a chance to challenge people on what many like to call a “color-blind”
society. Even looking at the privileged Blacks and Latinos who went to
schools good enough to qualify them to apply for college admission,
pretending equality is only possible if we ignore all the aspects of
oppression that these groups face in the U.$., from overt racial hatred
to subtle cultural messages of inferiority. Society sets oppressed
nation youth up for failure from birth, with TV and movies portraying
criminals as Black and Latino and successful corporate employees as
white. These youth are stopped by cops on the streets for the offense of
skin color alone, looked at suspiciously in stores, and presumed to be
less intelligent in school.
But the real problem is not the privileged Black and Latino students
qualified to apply for college admission. These individual students from
oppressed nations who are able to achieve enough to apply to colleges
that have admissions requirements are a part of the petty bourgeoisie.
The reality is very different for the other half of the oppressed nation
youth who are tracked right out of college from first grade (or before)
and have no chance of even attending a college that has admissions
requirements beyond a high school diploma.
Among the students who entered high school in ninth grade, 63% of
Latinos, 59% of Blacks and 53% of First Nations graduated high school in
2009. This is compared to 81% of Asians and 79% of whites. Overall the
Black-white and Latino-white graduation rate gap narrowed between 1999
and 2009 but is still very large.(2)
This recent court ruling reinforces our belief that we cannot expect
Amerika to reform away national oppression, even within U.$. borders
where some formerly oppressed nations have been integrated into the
oppressor majority. At this point in history, imperialism vs. the
oppressed nations is the principal contradiction both globally and
within u.s. borders. The dramatic differences in educational access and
achievement are just one example of the oppressed/oppressor nation
differentials. MIM(Prisons) fights on the side of oppressed nations
everywhere for the revolution that will overthrow imperialism end
national oppression.
While capitalism advances technology and produces consumables at high
rates, most people lack decent health care April 1 - The deadline
for enrollment in health insurance under the Affordable Care Act (ACA)
passed last night, and there are now 4.4 million people in the United
$tates newly enrolled in Medicaid health insurance plans sponsored by
the federal government, and another 8 million people newly enrolled in
government-regulated private insurance plans.(1) Those who do not enroll
in any insurance and are not covered by a plan through their family,
work or school will face fines. For people with incomes less than 400%
of the federal “poverty line,” the plans are subsidized by the
government, and those with less than 138% of this cut off will receive
free health care via Medicaid. In the end, for at least the lumpen class
the penalty will actually cost them more than having health insurance
would cost.
This new healthcare system in the United $tates, often called
“Obamacare,” is far from socialist, but it does serve as a good reminder
of the failures of capitalism to care for some of the basic needs of
imperialist country citizens. The United $tates has had government-run
healthcare for military service people and their families since the
1800s, and for the relatively poor, disabled and elderly since the 1960s
with the creation of Medicare and Medicaid. But these programs serve a
minority of Amerikans, leaving the rest to seek health care through
insurance provided by their work or through privately purchased plans or
by paying directly for services. This means that people out of work or
in jobs that don’t provide insurance coverage are often left without any
health insurance. The ACA attempts to address this problem by providing
a government-run program to help insure citizens without coverage.
We’re not going to take on the critics who say that health care quality
would go down if run by the Amerikan government. These same people would
abolish free universal education, privatize water distribution, and
eliminate the fire department. This is a debate between different
factions of the bourgeoisie, and not worth the time of communists,
except to point out that we have fundamentally different values. We have
no need to defend the ability of a capitalist government to run these
programs well because we don’t support capitalist governments. And we
know that the profit motive does not make for greater “efficiency”, as
capitalists like to claim. We see this clearly in the United $tates
where food is dumped rather than distributed to people going hungry, and
the tremendous waste of money on advertising rather than meeting basic
needs.
Communists think about health care the same way we think about
education, food, clean water and other basic necessities. These are
things we seek to provide to all people indiscriminately. We prioritize
basic humyn needs over luxury items like boats, fancy cars, big houses,
TVs, etc. Capitalism, on the other hand, functions on the concept that
profitable luxury items are a priority over basic humyn needs. While in
a matter of years capitalism has gotten hand-held computers into the
hands of anyone with a little disposable income, the decades-long
struggle against easily preventable diseases in the Third World
continues. Millions of children under five years old die each year in
southern Asia and Africa south of the Sahara as a result. We believe
that the Affordable Care Act should offer these people free health care
services as well. While the ACA has proven once again that small reforms
in capitalism can be achieved when they serve the interests of
imperialist country citizens, capitalism will never allow reforms to
improve the lot of the rest of the world. In fact, even within U.$.
borders non-citizens are not eligible for insurance under the ACA. Those
most in need, working the hardest and most dangerous jobs for the least
money, are still denied basic health care.
While it’s easy for Amerikans to ignore what goes on outside of their
borders, it should be an embarrassment for Amerikan imperialism that the
individualism of its citizens is so strong that until now they had
refused health care to even their own relatively well-off citizens. Even
now, many across the country continue to fight and resist this new law.
Prior to the Affordable Care Act, Amerikans who wanted to buy health
insurance on their own were often rejected by the health plans for
“pre-existing conditions.” This means the health plans were picking only
the healthiest individuals for insurance, leaving those with even minor
history of health problems with no recourse because most insurance plans
in the United $tates are privately run for a profit. Now most insurance
in this country is still run for profit, but the federal and state
governments provide minimum standards of care that must be provided with
every policy, and sell these approved insurance plans on a marketplace,
in hopes that the market competition inherent in capitalism will
increase quality and transparency while reducing cost.
Abolishing the profit motive behind health care will be a priority for
communists when we take control of a government. We want to make
preventive care and treatment available to all people. The new ACA law
in the United $tates does not eliminate private insurance or remove the
profit from health care, and it’s a fundamentally timid step towards
universal coverage for Amerikans. But it does enable people to get
health insurance regardless of income or health status. For Amerikan
citizens this is progress. And for most it is part of the ongoing
bribery of these citizens by the imperialists, ensuring their allegiance
to the imperialist system. However, a large number of the uninsured in
the United $tates come from the oppressed nation lumpen class, and the
ACA is a positive step for the survival and healthy living of this group
which has a relatively high material interest in revolution.(3) Overall
we see the ACA as a progressive step towards universal health care for
everyone in the world, if only because it demonstrates the concept of
health care as a basic right.
We will continue to fight for health care for the world’s exploited and
oppressed, who are mostly found in the Third World, where even basic
medical services are difficult to obtain. 801,000 children under age 5
die from diarrhea each year, most of which are caused by lack of access
to clean water and sanitation. More than 3 million people die from
vaccine-preventable diseases each year. 86% of deaths among children
under age 5 are preventable and due to communicable, treatable disease,
birth issues and lack of nutrition. These abysmal numbers would cost
very little to rectify. Truly universal health care is a priority for
communists, and the statistics above are just a few reasons why the
overthrow of capitalism is literally a life or death issue for the
majority of the world’s people.
This computer animated story could have been a feature length ad for the
popular children’s toy, funded by Lego itself, but it’s not hard to read
a not-too-subtle communist message into this movie. From the main plot
it appears that Marx’s conclusions are logical to anyone thinking about
organized work and struggle against those dominating the world for
persynal gain. What is particularly refreshing about this movie is the
strong theme that heroes are not people with special talent but rather
the masses are all heroes when we unleash their creativity.
The movie starts off in Lego world with regular ordinary construction
worker Emmet, as he follows the instruction booklet for life, produced
by the Octan Corporation, which details how he should dress, what music
to listen to, the expensive coffee to drink, what brainless TV to watch,
and how to do his job working with lots of other people building things
that are without purpose and will be torn down to be built again another
day. These workers are uncreative, but very cooperative in their work.
When it comes time to fight back against President Business, the CEO of
Octan Corp., who is trying to dominate the world, it is Emmet who
realizes that the collective organization of the workers is
indispensable to building the resistance against Octan. In fact, the
Lego heros (batman, spaceman, superman, NBA players, etc.) find their
heroic individualism an impediment in their attempts to fight back as an
organized group.
These are themes of Marxism, which sees that the organized labor of the
industrial proletariat will make up the leadership of the communist
revolution because of their unique position exposed directly to the
contradiction of collective labor being deployed for individual profit.
But there is another layer to this Marxist theme because the workers are
not actually proletarian in the Lego land. There is no profit in the
construction work which appears to just be happening to keep everyone
busy. The workers are paid a high salary, judging from Emmet’s living
conditions. In reality these workers are a labor aristocracy just like
we have in the imperialist countries today, where workers are bought off
with the superprofits from exploitation of unseen workers in the Third
World. The complete lack of productivity of the Lego workers underscores
the impossibility that they are the ones creating the profits. No longer
a part of the proletariat in the real world, these workers will defend
imperialism against revolutionary forces to maintain their elevated
standard of living. So we wouldn’t actually expect them to lead the
revolution that is serving the interests of the global proletariat.
However, at some point a contradiction may arise that is such a threat
to the labor aristocracy that they will be compelled to join the forces
of revolution. This threat will likely be life threatening, like Lord
Business’s plot to kill everyone. But until that contradiction arises,
we should expect the labor aristocracy to join in the chorus of the Lego
theme song “Everything is Awesome,” and continue their unproductive
labor, enjoying their capitalist-created entertainment.
In the beginning of the movie Vitruvius, the white-haired god-like
leader of the forces of good, prophesies that there will be an
individual who will rise up to lead the resistance and foil the ultimate
plot of Lord Business. These strong religious overtones are nicely
dispelled later when Vitruvius confesses that he made up the prophesy
because he thought it would help average people believe in themselves,
and in fact he knows that the creativity of the masterbuilders (heroes)
exists within everyone.
In the end Emmet is able to convince Lord Business that he doesn’t have
to be evil and so the communist theme is undermined by the pacifist view
that we can convince those with money and power to give up exploiting
and oppressing the people of the world. Communists know that this
fairytale ending is far from the reality that will require violent
overthrow of the bourgeoisie, and ongoing military force to keep them
from reclaiming power until we can transform society and create a
culture that does not nurture individualism and profit over people.
While news of online spying by the U.$. government is growing, a court
case may provide even broader access for government agencies. This case
involves
Lavabit,
the former email provider for MIM(Prisons). On January 28, the owner
of Lavabit went to court to appeal the contempt of court ruling against
the company for failing to hand over encryption keys to his email
service. The 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals has not yet rendered a
verdict, but it will have significant implications on what the
government can demand of email providers in the future. This case
revolves around the Lavabit SSL keys. These keys were used to decrypt
incoming traffic from Lavabit users accessing via an encrypted
connection. If Lavabit had given up the keys before shutting down their
operation, the government could capture every users password next time
they logged in and have full access to their email.
Last June Lavabit was ordered to give the government a live feed of
email activity for a specific account. People generally assume this was
Edward Snowden’s account based on court filing information that refers
to his violations of the Espionage Act and theft of government property.
Lavabit founder Lader Levison offered to transmit the information
requested after 60 days, claiming he needed time to reprogram his system
to collect the information. We can’t be sure what Levison would have
ultimately handed over, but this is further evidence that users can not
rely on their email providers for security. In fact, in court Lavabit’s
attorney claims that Levison had complied with at least one similar
court order in the past.(1)
In July, after Levison’s delay, the FBI served Levison with a search
warrant demanding the private SSL keys that would enable them to decrypt
all traffic to and from the site. The government promised to only use
the keys for the individual targeted and said they would not spy on the
other 410,000 Lavabit users.(2)
The FBI had already begun collecting encrypted data from Lavabit’s
upstream provider in anticipation of getting the key to decrypt it, and
they still have this data.(2) If the government has the SSL keys, all
emails for an unknown period of time for all users on the Lavabit email
system are in the hands of the government.
After an August 1 court order upholding the government’s demand for the
Lavabit SSL keys, Levison did turn them over, but as an 11 page printout
in 4-point type.(1) This was clearly an attempt to comply in form
without making the key usable, or at least delaying its usability. But
in spite of the paper form, the government now has the Lavabit SSL keys,
all they need to do is manually enter the 2,560 characters. While
tedious, this is certainly doable and we think it likely that they
quickly completed this work.
The government responded to the printout by demanding an electronic
format and on August 6 began fining Levison $5,000 per day until he
complied with the FBI’s order. Levison shut down Lavabit altogether on
August 8.(2)
Although the government and the appellate court Judge hearing the case
both claim the SSL keys could not be used for anything other than the
individual target in question, the search warrant and sanctions order
both place no restrictions on what can be done with the key.(2) Not that
we think the government complies with these sorts of formalities anyway.
Newly released information about the British GCHQ and Amerikan NSA
expose the agencies’ work to manipulate and undermine online individuals
and organizations. In addition to the monitoring of online activity,
email, and phone calls, the government tactics include Denial of Service
attacks to shut down websites, releasing viruses to destroy computers,
traps to lure people into compromising situations using sex, and release
of false information to destroy reputations.
Previous Snowden documents revealed
widespread
spying by U.$ and British government agencies. These new documents
confirm what we’ve said for years: the government has a long running
infiltration and misinformation campaign to disrupt and manipulate
individuals and groups they see as dangerous. This is particularly
focused on political activists.
The online attacks were detailed in a 2012 presentation from the British
Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group (JTRIG) presented to the U.$,
Australian, Canadian and New Zealand intelligence agencies. The slides
describe this “Cyber Offensive” as “Pushing the Boundaries and Action
Against Hacktivism.” Essentially this is a way to attack people who are
not charged with any crimes but are seen as somehow dangerous, generally
because of their political protests.
One of the tactics, called false flag operations, involves posting
material online that is falsely attributed to someone, and includes
“write a blog purporting to be one of their victims”, “email/text their
colleagues, neighbours, friends etc,” and “change their photos on social
networking sites.” This is a continuation of the COINTELPRO work of the
Amerikan spy agencies targeting activist organizations in the 1960s,
moved online for faster and more efficient attacks on enemies of the
government. Those who have studied the Black Panther Party know about
the government-led infiltratration and misleadership, false letters sent
to disrupt internal communication and create divisions, and many other
tactics used to imprison and destroy the most advanced and effective
revolutionary organization of its time. Maoism is just as dangerous to
the U.$. government today as it was in the 1960s, and just as our
organizing work has advanced, their COINTELPRO work has also advanced.
It is right for our readers to ask, as
one
reader did in 2012, “I am concerned you have been already
infiltrated or you’re a CIA front organization claiming revolutionary
organizing.” We should question all individuals and organizations in
this way, and judge them by their actions. You can’t just take someone’s
word that they are a revolutionary; their political line and actions
must be correct. And even then, there is no reason to give out more
information about yourself than absolutely necessary. As we outlined in
our article
“Self-Defense
and Secure Communications”, we can make the government’s job much
more difficult by taking some basic security precautions in our work.
These latest Snowden revelations remind us of the struggle of the Maoist
Internationalist Party - Amerika (the vanguard party of the Maoist
Internationalist Movement in the United $tates in the 1980s to 2000s)
which had its information hosted on the etext.org website. Throughout
their decades of work they often encountered forces on the internet that
they characterized as cops based on their politics and behavior. This
goes much deeper than our
warnings
against using corporate online social networks for organizing work.
It requires a continued study of politics in order to guard against
online pigs who will often outnumber the proletariat forces in that
forum. Without a continued study and application of politics in such
work, people quickly degenerate into nihilism because they are unable to
trust anyone they interact with online. An unwillingness to engage in
scientific skepticism will often lead to such nihilism and/or a
degeneration to doing work that does not threaten imperialism to avoid
these struggles.
Before MIP-Amerika ceased to exist one of its underground leaders went
public with his name and persynal information in an attempt to fight
back against behind-the-scenes government attacks. Many of the attacks
he described come right out of this JTRIG playbook. In response to the
situation, many of the MIM posts on etext.org were focused on security
and confusing to most readers. But that doesn’t make the struggle
undertaken there incorrect, and these latest revelations lend further
credence to the revelations from MIM. We can only assume that as the
organization with the most correct revolutionary line within the United
$tates, the government spy agencies focused significant attention on
disrupting and destroying the MIP-Amerika. While that specific
organization no longer exists, there are new Maoist groups like
MIM(Prisons)
continuing
the legacy of MIM, and we have a responsibility to be diligent about
security to ensure our continued existence.
Prisoners in Texas have been fighting the
recently
enacted restrictions on indigent correspondence which restricts
indigent prisoners to 5 one-ounce domestic letters per month. As we’ve
explained in
other
articles, this is an attack on the growing number of revolutionary
voices in Texas speaking out to expose the barbaric treatment and
inhumane conditions. One comrade created a grievance that prisoners can
file and a list of people to contact to demand this policy be changed.
We are now getting reports of responses to these grievances. And as
usual, the prisons are just giving us the run-around.
One prisoner got a response to his grievance stating: “TDCJ as an Agency
revised Board Policy 03.91 in August of 2013 affecting indigent mail.
Those decisions are not made at the Unit level, merely enforced. No
further action warrented.”(sic)
Further, several prisoners have received form letters from the TDCJ
Ombudsman’s Office telling them that they Ombudsman will not be
responding and they should contact the “appropriate unit staff” instead.
“Issues regarding unit operations, disciplinary disputes, property
issues, mail or any other matter relating to conditions of care or
supervision may be formally addressed through the Offender Grievance
Procedure…”
So basically the Ombudsman’s Office says prisoner’s must take up this
issue via a grievance. And the unit staff respond to prisoner’s
grievances saying they can not address this issue because it is a
state-wide policy. The original campaign urged people to contact a
variety of TDCJ leaders and Texas politicians. To date we have no
reports of any response from them.
This campaign is an important battle to ensure the voices of Texas
prisoners can be heard. Limits on correspondance mean we will be unable
to get regular reports of abuses behind bars, and unable to maintain
study and communication with politically active comrades. We must
continue the pressure and demand more than just form letters and
dismissals to our protests.