Under Lock & Key

I want to write about my thoughts on prison reform and rehabilitation specifically in the state of Pennsylvania. Prison reform? Criminal “justice” reform? As long as the criminal justice system and the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections (PDOC) remain lucrative industries those things will never happen!

To have any type of reform, I believe people should be held accountable for their misconduct (judges, prosecutors, governors, secretary of corrections, correctional officers, etc.) but that’s never the case in Pennsylvania. Here in Pennsylvania, these rural areas in particular, the PDOC is a refuge for the unqualified and uneducated, who don’t desire anything better for themselves.

Pennsylvania’s state budget is crumbling due to the amount of overtime received by COs and to the excess state employees hired in the PDOC. Governor Wolf announced that he wanted to lay off 900 unneeded state employees and close a few jails because of the budget strain. However, Governor Wolf was opposed (almost violently) by the rural population. Their argument wasn’t about the “criminals” that could possibly go free; they were concerned about not finding employment anywhere else. Overwhelmed, Wolf decided to only close one prison (which wasn’t in a rural area) and retain the state employees (COs).

Instead of doing what he originally saw fit to do, Wolf was forced to cut back on the Meals on Wheels program, raise the state tax, and allow the sale of alcohol on Sundays amongst other things. As you would figure, all of those cutbacks didn’t even begin to alleviate the budgetary stress. Why? Because those things weren’t issues.

The fact still exist that there are too many state prison officials being hired and Pennsylvania needs to cut back on this senseless hiring, but Gov. Wolf was pretty much bullied out of action. All of this factors into the lack of prison and criminal justice reform, for if there was someone who could educate the tax payers who honestly believe that their “hard earned” dollars are “keeping their community safe” instead of funding a correctional officer’s workers’ compensation scam, educate them about where their money is actually going and what needs to be done. If a majority of the tax payers knew the truth about their money, about the funding of our oppression, suppression and torture, I believe that they would be more inclined to demand criminal justice and prison reform.

MIM(Prisons) responds: This writer provides a good exposure of the interest that prison guard unions and other prison employees have in maintaining or increasing the number of imprisoned people and the number of prisons in the United $tates. And also the political power these workers can exert when their jobs are threatened.

But we have to put this information in a larger context. Prisons are a very small part of state budgets, so it’s not the CO overtime causing the Pennsylvania budget to crumble. In the Pennsylvania 2016-2017 budget, 8% went towards prisons.(1) It is good that the budget crisis in Pennsylvania is leading to considerations of closing prisons, but the response by COs and others benefiting from jobs with the prisons is the same we see across the country. Nonetheless, we need to be honest that shutting down a few prisons won’t make much of a dent in the state budget.

While we would also like to think that people faced with information about oppression and torture would oppose it, we don’t think the terrible conditions in Amerikan prisons are such a big secret. Many Amerikans are vocal in calling for even worse conditions, arguing that prisoners deserve whatever happens to them. And there is little outrage when stories of corruption among prison guards come out. The financial rewards all Amerikans are getting by living here within this wealthy imperialist country has created a population that supports imperialism and its criminal injustice system. While the oppressed nations within U.$. borders do generally come down against the oppression and corruption, the Amerikkkan nation, especially in rural counties, can be counted on to throw its support behind the system.

What I’d like to discuss is organizing the streets. Not directly about how to organize the uprising of the masses, but how prisoners can communicate about the necessary revolution within prisons. How can the public, organizations/organizers, and activists be encouraged to lend support (action) to the prison struggle? While these are important questions, they are only the second half of the equation. The first half is: what must be done by us behind bars before the public can be induced to struggle with us?

Let’s be realistic – people are self-centered. Very few people put much, if any, effort into matters that don’t directly affect them (or have a strong potential to do so). By effort I mean attention, thought, energy and so on. It’s an habitual characteristic throughout capitalistic societies. So our first priority is to consider, how can we convey to them that the prison struggle affects them directly? This is best done by making the struggle personal to them. Once we personalize something it becomes important to us (my gang, my family, my favorite song or what not), and we place greater significance on it. Remember, you’re in prison. Society’s view, in general, is: you deserve whatever you get, at best, or you’re worthless and don’t merit any consideration, at worst. Society disdains “criminals” and we must overcome this obstacle. Our ideal way is to help them “see” the deprivation and cruelty from our position inside the beast.

After they’ve personalized our struggle, our first big obstacle is over, we can move on to encouraging their support. It can be easily accomplished in the same way lumpen organizations (LOs) recruit: conversations and written communications, conveying the idea, principle, reason, goal and our conviction (more important than the rest) of its (the struggle) rightness. You can explain until your tongue’s swollen, but even the most logical or reasonable arguments will fail to penetrate anybody’s heart without the flame of genuine conviction. As the proletariat must be taught their historical role, so do potential activists, organizers, and the public, in regards to the struggle.

After overcoming these inconveniences, it’s time for us to work putting action behind our words: pursuing joint studies, research, collaborative analyses, letters to individuals or organizations, social (in the community or online community) initiatives and so on. Into the trenches we bring them, baptized by fire, and out of the trenches we come united. It isn’t enough to simply point and shoot. It’s more of a golf lesson, together we teach them to swing. With this understanding fully established in our minds, it’s time for some practical concerns.

How or who do we contact in order to spread knowledge about the struggle? Start with people you know. I also suggest looking into the organizations that already exist: Critical Resistance, News & Letters, Solitary Watch, the Brown Berets, to name a few, but there’s more. Since you’re reading ULK, you should start there, but don’t stop there. Contact the others (many are in the PARC directory, see page 3), contribute to them if you agree with their mission, because we’re all more likely to help those who help us. Eventually, you’ll expand from one or two contacts to three or more, finding people who will do the ground work you can’t do physically.

Is it a waste of time, energy and resources? No, not at all, because no major struggle is won without wide mass support. This includes Latin America’s freedom from España, slavery in the United $tates, wimmin’s suffrage, UFW (United Farm Workers) or civil rights movements. As in those situations, in the prison struggle authorities will offer resistance (censorship, segregation, etc.) to prisoner activists’ efforts, so don’t get discouraged, and be prepared. Here, success is an eventuality, not just a possibility.

MIM(Prisons) responds: We appreciate this author’s outline of necessary steps to organizing people on the streets. We just want to comment on one point, regarding how to find people to work with through the mail. This writer suggests people look at organizations that already exist to find folks to do ground work and movement building with, and also to write to people you already know.

The benefit to reaching out to people you already know, who aren’t yet involved in anti-imperialist or prison organizing, is that you can potentially bring new people into the movement. When doing this type of work, always keep security in mind and try to assess political agreement separate from disclosing the political work that you actually do. Tactics for assessing how open someone is to being recruited, and how to get them to actually take up work, belong to a different discussion.

A good thing about reaching out to organizations directly is that they are full of people who have already been turned on to politics. Organizations likely have a structure for handling incoming mail from prisoners. For better or worse, because it also may mean they already have a lofty workload.

But a primary consideration when reaching out to organizations is to think carefully about the political line of the organizations you are attempting to work with, and get with groups where you have political agreement. Overall, it is political line that determines our strategy, and correctness of this line and strategy will determine the success of our struggle in the long term. MIM(Prisons) has some significant disagreements with some of the groups mentioned above on very fundamental questions of political line. We encourage people to study their material and decide for yourself what is right and what’s the best way forward for our movement. You can write to us for literature to study on the many political lines out there and why we think Maoism is the best way forward for the oppressed people of the world.

Recently AFW sponsored a handball tournament on C Facility at High Desert State Prison. I had the honor organizing this event, alongside of XYZ the founder of AFW. When my brother asked me to help him organize this event, I was more than willing to oblige. XYZ was willing to use his own money to pay for prizes for the winners of this tournament. It’s unselfish acts like this that change the world. The fact that the brother had an idea to bring this facility together in a show of solidarity, unity & peace is what impressed me, and I had to be a part of it.

It’s ideas like this that change the world. Wasn’t it the great Martin Luther King that had an idea that blacks & whites could co-exist together in peace? I dare not compare the Civil Rights Movement to a handball tournament. However, peace was the goal in both of these ideas, and peace is a principle that we all should strive for.

You know, this isn’t the first time XYZ asked me to perform an unselfish act. September 9th 2016, as a show of solidarity, I refrained from certain things, and went out of my way to do something I normally would not do. By doing this I learned something about myself. So I knew by helping with this tournament, a lesson about self lay in wake. I learned that I have a knack for organization and I also enjoy bringing people together on positivity. XYZ don’t need pats on the back because he knows who he is. But I have the utmost respect and admiration for the Brotha because he is the example of how ideas can teach and reach people in profound ways.

Great Minds Talk About Ideas.

Small Minds Talk About Other People.

Abolitionists From Within

Platform

1. The Party remained a reform group, not a revolutionary organization (while in prison).

2. We will remain at peace while practicing humility and working for legislative solution (while in prison).

3. We shall advocate an obedience to the California Code of Regulations Title 15 (while in prison).

Party Principles

1. Denounced Black-on-Black crimes.

2. Struggling for a better community.

3. Struggling for racial equality (inside these walls).

4. To uphold all points in United Front for Peace in Prisons’ statement of principles.

5. We endorse nothing, but take the chances for everything in attempting to abolish the system (prison, SHU, penal code, etc.).

6. Raise the banner of liberty, equality and fraternity.

Comrades

I come to talk to you of those who stand in the shadow of their own scaffolds. I come to you an avowed revolutionist. But I incite no one to rest. The convicts have no rights which the COs have to respect. The Constitution is a dead letter to the convicts of the United States.

We Need To Unite

MIM(Prisons) adds: Follow this comrade’s example and write to us for our September 9 organizing pack and get ready for this year’s Day of Peace and Solidarity.

[This letter is responding to the debate we printed in ULK 55: ”Debating Theory, Building Unity for September 9 Protests”]

Let me try to run through this as quick as possible. To the point yo. That original article in the ULK 50 was pretty half-assed. Admittedly, so was my response to it.

So, first lemme say that there were a few typos in my response that made some significant differences. Mainly I wanna be clear that it said I don’t care about your “lies.” The correct word was “line.”

Also, I have no fuckin clue what “Post-Fordism” could possibly mean. What the fuck is “Fordism”? I said “Post-Marxist”. We live in a “Post-Marxist” era.

As for my acceptance of status quo definitions of “slavery”, I don’t accept it simply because it’s what is commonly presented to us, but because I more or less agree with it.

I do fully agree with your analysis concerning the exploited global proletariat as being the theoretical primary contradiction. Capitalist imperialism depends solely on expropriation of land and resources. In order to sustain capitalist rule this can only come as a result of perpetual expansion into foreign lands, etc., and not to mention wholesale slaughter of oppressed peoples across the globe. Imperialism being inherently nationalistic this means “global” class systems emerge and so there you see our analysis is virtually identical.

Now if you can explain to me how we can apply this dialectically correct analysis into revolutionary practice – aside from pencil-pushing while capitalism further secures itself by snowballing into a fascist state – sign me up. But in my studies of all revolutionary lines, I’ve yet to find a red theory that institutes practice in our current material time and place.

I’m a nihilist. I accept no theory/analysis simply because it’s common to any rev camp, but only if it jives with absolute objective and dialectically correct theo-analysis. I find red analysis to be exceptionally on point. But I find major flaws in dictatorships of any stripe based in historical evidence. Authority always shows to turn into tyranny. Communists are just as guilty of mass-murder and oppression as any fascist state and I find the differentiation between “nationalistic” socialism and so-called “international” socialism to be mostly a matter of semantics. Don’t get me started on Bolshevism being the theoretical root of fascism, evidenced by Hitler’s distribution of Leninist literature. So I’ll close this by saying red analysis is sound. But fundamentally anarchist methodology and principles are the only realistic road to a true egalitarian society. I don’t swallow this because of identity politics – be it the black flag or the red – but because it’s true. And so I apply red analysis to anarchist principles.

Next, obviously I do recognize the importance of line as my writing clearly demonstrates. You make exactly the point of why it’s important in your paragraph number five and others. When I say I don’t care about line, what I mean is that I don’t conform to any line simply because it’s a generally accepted body of politics. Though I will and do align myself with any line if it jives with my correct social analysis, theory, or mode of practice. In my case, red analysis, black theory (black meaning anarchist).

Obviously I’m also a big fan of theory. Marxist dialectics being the pinnacle of revolutionary science, this is my area of professionalism in fact. So, when I told you “your theory is based in theory”, you omitted the first part of my statement which was that black theory is based in practice. So “anarchist theory is based in practice, red theory is based in theory.” That was my statement, which demonstrates my ascription to theoretical science. I simply see no potential for practical application of red theory, and I’ve seen nothing from red camps that show otherwise.

Further, I say I don’t care about line, as in when I’m participating in any revolutionary campaign – not political agenda, but revolutionary campaign, which is different – I could really give a shit if you’re a militant red or a backwoods biker for Christ. If you’re with the business we’re crackin’ off then I’ll ride in the same car with you. Do I dig your political line? That’s irrelevant during campaigns as long as our interests intersect on the immediate issues. This is also what Bakunin meant and myself when I quote him when he said in a letter to his sister “sometimes you have to throw theory into the fire for it only spoils life” – spoils, not “stalls” (another typo). We’re saying theory that cannot be applied, no matter how sound, is worthless. At that time he was still practicing Hegelian dialectics which is nihilistic in nature. And then he went and got himself a political agenda and became just as boring as Marx.

As I state in my original critique, your original article has a clear contradiction in your dudes’ own analysis. The paragraph #5 and paragraph #10 directly contradict each other. But whatever. As I said, it was kinda half-assed and it’s a mostly irrelevant point within all our other conversation on this shit. Ultimately I maintain my original statement on this which you neglected only to reiterate the same point which is that in refusing to participate in these pigs’ exploitative practices, clearly I said “the P.I.C. will have to adjust to accommodate us.” That does not even suggest a declaration that it will “close all prisons.” For the record, I quoted a comrade from the Free Virginia Movement when I said that.

Lastly in my own personal defense of nihilism, I find red political agenda idealistic and historically and theoretically frightening and horrific. Be that as it may, I actually find anarchist ideas about some revolutionary end result of global economic syndications just as whimsical, and frankly unfavorable as any other systemic socio-economic structure. It’s basically just another formula based around labor and industry and distribution of wealth and so on. It fails to bring into question the value and dependence of labor and production in itself. So ultimately it may be egalitarian in theory, which I align with in regard to revolutionary practice in our current socio-economic landscape, as we work from a decentralized organizational praxis. At the end of the day, the idea is to still be subject to industry, and so becomes somewhat mechanical and antithetical to the liberated spirit of the inherent animal nature of humanity. Further, any system, be it hierarchical like communism, or horizontal like anarchism, if it’s a system designed to control the means of production, it is susceptible to corruption and a gradual development toward the control of humans by the worst part of other humans. In this case, the nihilist, rejecting all idealistic political theory, will be just as likely to attack and destroy anarchist syndicalism as she would any other system. That is, if it begins to be corrupted – which it would.

And so what this means for the nihilist is that we look forward to nothing but our cigarettes, our bitter coffee, and destruction.

I suppose I could go on and nit pick some more shit, but there’s no point. I think we understand each other, and so I shall withdraw back into the black coils of my madness. Feel free to reawaken me for purposes of business or pleasure.

In the end, I hope I speak for everyone who gives a shit when I say I look forward to solidifying an alliance with you – as I’ve done before – for the coming tidal wave against the agony of oppression.

Face first in the fight for peace.

MIM(Prisons) responds: We appreciate Zero’s willingness to continue the dialogue over our theoretical disagreements, and to build our practical unity in the struggle against oppression in which we do have much agreement. We want to reiterate that at this stage in the struggle, we have more unity with Zero and other anarchists than we have differences. We are all fighting to overthrow imperialism, and to take on that enemy we need a united front of all the enemies of the imperialist state. As Zero stresses that means uniting around the battles of the day, despite ideological differences.

There’s no need to reiterate our responses to most of Zero’s points, instead we want to take this opportunity to again comment on the theoretical debate over anarchism vs. communism and what’s the best way to achieve liberation for the world’s oppressed. As we’ve said before, anarchists and communists are fighting for the same end goal: a world where no group of people has power over any other group of people. Contrary to how Zero phrases it above, saying communism is hierarchical while anarchism is horizontal, anarchism is the communist’s ultimate goal, we just disagree on how to get there. It is the getting-there process where communists believe in the use of force and repression of the oppressors.

This may seem like a theoretical and esoteric discussion that doesn’t have much relevance to our day-to-day organizing. After all, we all know that right now the imperialists hold the power, and in the context of the prison struggle the criminal injustice system is a daunting and powerful enemy that we are all struggling against in many arenas. We aren’t close to a revolutionary situation in the United $tates today, and so neither the communists nor the anarchists are in a position to seize power tomorrow. But this theory informs our practice in the struggle. Zero understands this and so stands firm in eir political positions, weaving them into eir discussion of the September 9th protests. In this we completely agree with Zero. In the long run this theory will determine whether or not (and how quickly) we are successful in overthrowing imperialism, which for many in the world is a life and death battle.

As scientists, we look to history to inform us about the most effective theory and strategy. Zero takes this same approach but draws different conclusions from eir study of history. We disagree with Zero’s analysis that there isn’t a significant distinction between communism and fascism (ey wrote: “the differentiation between ‘nationalistic’ socialism and so-called ‘international’ socialism to be mostly a matter of semantics.”) Obviously Zero knows that fascism is an ideology that promotes the oppression of certain groups of people to the benefit of others, while communism promotes the end of oppression of groups of people. But studying the historical practice of communist revolutions we come to different conclusions from Zero. While capitalist propaganda tries to convince us that communists are brutal and murderous dictators, a careful study of Russian and Chinese history, from history books not written by capitalist apologists, demonstrates otherwise.

First we will state the obvious: neither the Russian nor the Chinese revolutions succeeded in implementing communism. Both reached a socialist state and then were overthrown by state capitalists from within. But during the years when they were implementing socialism and building towards communism, both countries made tremendous contributions to humynity. There are several important metrics we could look at here. To name just a few important ones: (1) Lives saved from feudalism/capitalism, i.e. people no longer starving to death, receiving health care, etc. (2) Lives saved from fascist and imperialist aggression, i.e. the Russian pivotal and central role in the defeat of Hitler and the fascists in World War II, the Chinese support for revolutionary movements around the world. (3) Advances made towards communism, i.e. the Chinese Cultural Revolution as a historical advance over the Russian implementation of socialism in terms of addressing the issues of corruption in socialist state structures through mass participation.

“The central problem with the critics of Stalin is that they do not understand the historical time period he lived in and the real-world choices that actually existed. Yes, he killed many people, too many even according to himself. However, all his repression combined was small compared with the lives he saved through the rapid and revolutionary transformation of society that he carried out. The choice the USSR had was not between liberal humyn-rights utopia on the one hand and tzarist era backwardness on the other. As if to drill this point into thick skulls, history has shown what happens after decades of criticism of Stalin: regression so that millions today are dying for lack of conditions that used to exist under Stalin almost 50 years ago! People supporting ‘humyn-rights’ and attacking Stalin are responsible for far more deaths than Stalin. That is evidence of the real world choices being faced – not between utopia and Stalin but between the pro-Western phony communists like Khruschev and Brezhnev and bourgeois politicians like Yeltsin on the one hand and Stalin on the road of Marxism-Leninism on the other hand. Stalin should be compared with other political leaders and then his merits will stand clear.

“Middle-class people from the West focus much too much on dissidents and not enough on causes of death such as food, clothing and basic medical care being lacking. Even including the repression he carried out, Stalin still doubled the life expectancy of his people. For this reason, polls of Russians on their favorite past leaders continue to show Stalin as the second most preferred leader of the past century, after Lenin. Although Amerikkkans love Lincoln more than Russians love Stalin, Stalin has a higher public acclaim than most U.S. presidents have amongst Amerikkkans, according to the survey by the Public Opinion fund cited in Pravda.” (From MIM Theory 6: The Stalin Issue)

Zero believes that humyn nature will inevitably lead to people seizing power for persynal gain if a state remains. In some ways Zero is correct. Zero’s conclusion is similar to what Maoists say about the dangers of a new bourgeoisie arising within the party because of the strong history and remnants of capitalist culture. People don’t just magically change overnight, and some will try to take advantage of opportunities to seize power and wealth even after a revolution. This is why the Chinese communists initiated the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution: to encourage and foster the criticism of leadership by the people so that leaders who become corrupt will be exposed and removed.

Communists believe that people are conditioned by their environment. We have loads of historical evidence to support this. And so, like the anarchists, we believe that if we can build a society where all people are equal and all people’s needs are met, and where the culture doesn’t encourage violence and power grabbing, but rather fosters cooperation and kindness, people will learn and adapt into this more peaceful existence. But unlike the anarchists, we don’t think this can be implemented overnight. We will need a period where we have a state to force the former-oppressor classes out of power and keep them from taking that power back. We call this state the dictatorship of the proletariat, because it is using the power of the state in the interests of the oppressed. And during this time we will also be fighting against new people trying to take and abuse power. During this period of cultural revolution we will be remaking the culture while we are transforming ourselves to think and work collaboratively, for the good of all of humynity. People won’t just start doing this on a mass scale spontaneously; it will take a long period of struggle against the capitalist patriarchal culture. The Chinese communists made significant strides, but we must continue to do more and better.

For people interested in going deeper into these questions we recommend a few readings:

1. There is an entire theory journal written by MIM in 1994 about Stalin, along with other relevant articles and reviews. Get MIM Theory 6.
   
2. For a deeper look at the successes and failures of communism we recommend MIM Theory 4, a theory journal by MIM, but also we distribute many books by both communists and non-communists detailing their experiences and observations in revolutionary China which provide objective (non-bourgeois-propaganda) facts about the real successes and struggles in that country under Mao.
3. We distribute several books and essays on the restoration of capitalism in the USSR and China for a more in-depth study of that history.

After reading ULK 54 I felt a lot of comrades put forth good ideas on tactics and strategy. One article in particular, “By Any Means Necessary”, written by a comrade in Maryland, was especially inspiring. While I’m impressed by the fire in this comrade’s belly, I’d humbly like to offer some added wisdom.

Practice is the only way to test the thoroughness of our revolutionary education (study of the past and analysis of the present to create theory for advancing towards communism) and resolve contradictions between theory and objective reality. Experience has shown us that in the struggle to supplant capitalism, there is no telling which campaigns will bear fruit and which will be fruitless. As MIM(Prisons) rightly states, even seemingly doomed projects, like grievance campaigns, can be valuable. It’s the small battles, lost and won, that constitute the formative education of the revolutionary and enable em to lead the people successfully by such experiences.

Experience also demonstrates compromise with the oppressor is impossible. No meaningful change can be negotiated if the oppressor class maintains power. This, as the past shows, is the only compromise they understand or tolerate. As such, I agree with a “by any means necessary” mentality being needed. But I feel that caution and restraint must always be in the forefront. By any means necessary can easily lead to ultra-leftism, which is debilitating; or “fearlessness,” equally detrimental; or worse still, an undisciplined revolutionary, an indiscriminately destructive force.

In our work we must be courageous but circumspect, undaunted but not oblivious, uncompromising in our mission but forever dialectical materialists. Mao wrote in “On Practice,” “There can be no knowledge apart from practice.” As on so much, Comrade Mao is correct. Our knowledge of struggles, fruitful and fruitless, directs our practice. Our practice leads to knowledge which directs our movement.

In August of 2016, a comrade was written up for possession of Security Threat Group (STG) contraband and given a 115 Rules Violation Report(RVR). This was in direct violation of the Ashker v. Brown class-action settlement agreement terms around “Due process” as described below. The new rules to reform isolation practices in California didn’t even eliminate the outrageous practice of using drawings and greeting cards as reasons to put people in isolation in California. The “due process” clause was the only promising term of the weak Ashker settlement, and it seems CDCR does not intend to uphold it.

Political repression is the clear motivation here, as the target is a well-known anti-imperialist who works tirelessly for the improvement of the New Afrikan nation.

On August 4, 2016, CO J. Hunter reviewed [XYZ]’s outgoing mail and found a drawing that included the image of a gorilla.

He based his conclusion that the drawing constituted “STG contraband” on:

1. In past investigations, he received information from unnamed BGF members and associates that the “Silverback Gorilla is symbolic for the strongest force of the Guerrillas much like how the Silverback Gorilla is considered to be the dominant leader amongst a family of gorillas.”

2. The word “Gorilla” can be found in various documents used by the BGF. He provides one example: The “I Stand Firm Oath” of the BGF includes a verse stating “Long live the graceful guerrilla.”

3. The BGF recognizes the gorilla as a symbol of stability and power.

4. The Office of Correctional Safety has established the credibility regarding the meaning of these symbols.

[XYZ] was found guilty of this offense and given 30 days confinement to cell, leaving only to shower. I have written him for these documents.

[XYZ] points out that item #1 above is based on unnamed confidential informants who allegedly have connected the “gorilla” animal with the BGF. However, CDCR has not complied with its own rules regarding confidential information (no 1030s, etc.) Also, this sentence makes no sense. Who are the “Guerrillas”? Does he mean BGF members or BGF leadership?

The picture depicts several fierce animals (lions, tigers, elephant, Pharaoh hound) and various male fighters who look more Aztec than African (to me). The gorilla does not dominate, nor is there anything else in the picture to suggest an STG.

The word “Gorilla” does not appear in the “I Stand Firm Oath” of the BGF. I was unable to find such an oath on the internet, but did find a BGF oath on a police-oriented website – see attached memo. It does not contain this term or phrase. The officer cites no authority for this claim, or is citing the confidential informants described above, without providing proper documentation.

The BGF’s view of the gorilla as a symbol of stability and power is also asserted without attribution, or it is attributed to confidential informants.

The statement about the OCS establishing credibility is insufficient. Credibility is a term referring to people – the statement does not say who the people are. But broad reference to another CDCR office establishing the credibility of an informant or the reliability of the information seems like an end run around the responsibility of the hearing officer.

Finally, on what authority does the mere drawing of an animal among other animals constitute gang contraband?

I have done a little internet research on the “Silverback gorilla.” Apparently, this refers to a mature male gorilla whose back hair has turned grey with age. He is the “alpha male” among the group of gorillas that he lives with. The drawing does not purport to be a Silverback gorilla. It doesn’t say it is a Silverback nor can you see his back. We can guess that the gorilla in the picture is male, but even that is not necessarily true. That the officer brings up the “Silverback gorilla” is suspect to me. He is making himself sound like he knows more than he really knows. He does not purport to be an expert himself, yet by throwing out this term, he is making himself sound knowledgeable.

[Comrades in Georgia have been suffering from and fighting against the Tier II program since its inception. Tier II is a long-term isolation program with indefinite terms and severe restrictions on communication and other “privileges.” Of course the program is officially not for disciplinary purposes. And of course the program has set terms on paper. Below is a portion of a petition some of our subscribers have signed on to and mailed out to various administrators. It illuminates in detail many of the problems that prisoners in Georgia are facing. In December 2014 another comrade from Smith State Prison mailed us a similar petition with over 30 signatures, which we publicized on our website. ]

In the name of liberty, life, and human rights the Administrative Segregation population at Georgia State Prison (GSP) is reaching out to you with hopes that you will advocate and intervene on our behalf to put an end to the horrific and inhumane conditions of confinement being forced upon us, through the implementation of the Administrative Segregation Tier II Program, because the grievance system here is a mockery and has rendered us no relief from the oppressive, repressive, and dehumanizing tactics of the Georgia Department of Corrections (GDC).

Georgia State Prison, which for decades has held a large lockdown population with some inmates being on lockdown for 20 or more years, began what is called the “Administrative Segregation Tier II Program” on July 16, 2014. On this date, GDC’s tactical squad, along with GSP’s correctional officers confiscated all of our personal clothing, hygiene products, health care products, books, photo albums, lawbooks, magazines, newspapers, CD players, radios, drinking cups, bowls, etc., with us only being allowed to keep 20 personal letters, a portion of legal mail, and a Qur’an or a bible (one or the other). Our personal hygiene products were replaced with only state-issue soap, toothpaste, and roll-on deodorant which are of very poor quality.

The guidelines for the Tier II Program (which lasts for a minimum of 9 months) places a ban on all books, newspapers, magazine (novels, textbooks, dictionaries, etc.) and many materials to self-educate ourselves. All books, magazines, newspapers, etc. which are mailed to us are returned to sender without giving us notification or a chance to appeal the prison’s decision.

We are not being allowed to continue educational correspondence courses to earn degrees or diplomas so that we can have a better chance of getting legitimate jobs upon release.

Inmates are allowed very restricted contact/access to the “free world” which is perpetuated in part by the ban on books and periodicals and the confiscation of all TVs and radios which effectively blocks us from being kept abreast of current events and aware of the world’s happenings beyond the prison’s gates. Phone calls and visits are limited to only 3 fifteen-minute collect calls and 3 two-hour non-contact visits for the first 6 months of the program.

We are not being given proper access to the law/courts. Tier II inmates are routinely denied “law-library” by officers. The law library for Ad-Seg inmates only has seven small holding pens and one computer to service the needs of the entire lockdown population, which is approximately 600-700 prisoners.

We are not being given the proper nutrition or portions of food and are not being allowed to purchase commissary as a means to supplement the malnutrition being forced upon us. This is evident in the fact that the number of prisoners being placed on medical diets to increase weight and calorie intake has made a steep incline. Bugs (both live and dead) are often found in the food and the officers still force the trays on the prisoners.

We are inadequately clothed. The prison won’t provide us with the proper clothing and won’t allow us to purchase the clothing we need.

We are not being given the means to sanitize the cells that we are housed in. The cells are filthy. Most have food, blood, and feces on the walls and there is a serious rodent and insect infestation. We cannot even flush our own toilets; we rely on officers to flush the toilets for us so we may have feces and urine in the toilets for hours at a time.

We are not being allowed to have the hygiene products that we need and are not allowed to purchase any so most inmates have a foul odor because the deodorant the state issues us doesn’t work for most of us.

We are routinely denied the right of religious freedom and expression. We are not allowed to practice beliefs that forbid cutting the hair, keeping kosher or other restrictions from eating certain foods.

Prisoners are subjected to brutality, humiliation, and harassment by correctional officers and staff at any given time. Prisoners are often assaulted while in handcuffs/restraints for no reason at all, but most frequently for practicing “freedom of speech.” If a prisoner addresses the warden or other administrative staff about anything they don’t like, or mistreatment, you are liable to be sprayed with mace, OC spray, any of the other toxic gases, stripped naked and humiliated and be placed on “stripped cell” with no bedding, clothing, or anything else (regardless of the temperature) for 8 or more hours just for exercising your 1st Amendment rights.

Mental health prisoners are often times punished for mental infirmities and deficiencies which are beyond their control and made worse by the conditions of confinement forced upon them. Mental health patients here are suffering because of a lack of treatment and staff. Many are wrongly diagnosed and are either over- or under-medicated.

Prisoners validated by the GDC as being part of Goodfellas, Young Mafia Family or plain and simply as “Mob” are being subjected to group punishment and all prisoners with this validation are kept on Tier II, and most have been on lockdown since November 2011 or even longer. The Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for the Tier II program states that prisoners can only be held on the program for 2 years, but those validated as “Mob” are being transferred from prison to prison at the completion of one prison’s Tier program requirements and forced to begin the program again at the entry level at the new facility.

We know that prison isn’t supposed to be comfortable, but what we are experiencing at the hands of the administrators and staff here is torture and extreme abuse of authority. Regardless of our debts to society, we are no less human than anyone else. Many of us are mentally unstable, indigent, or have no family or friends who are willing to help us fight for our rights to be treated like human beings and not be subjected to such demoralizing and dehumanizing treatment.

Your Texas Pack will support my contentions and add fuel to the fire I have started. You participate in the same practice I do and have been doing since 2010. I apply the law in my grievances. I apply PD-22 in correlation to ED-02.01 and apply the facts of official misconduct that lands officials on administrative probation or suspended 30, 60, or 90 days. I applaud your practice. I appreciate your action, and your newsletter gives me hope that I am not alone in fighting this Goliath that has no moral value. Thank you for your presence and participation.

I am on Powledge Unit after fighting my way to here via Bother units where I still have civil actions pending. But this unit enjoys retaliating against you for your protected right to file grievances or complain. Standards for prison operations in this country are made by the American Correctional Association (ACA), and ACA Standard 4-4274 states I have a protected right to complain about my conditions and official misconduct without fear of retaliation, but the guards don’t know that it exists in ATC Rules. See ATC-040. It has been my safety beacon in many grieves.

The state works off the ignorance of inmates – our comrades so to speak. I am requesting that you keep doing what you do and teach the prisoners. Inform them of their rights, privileges, immunities under the Constitution. Where the prisoners of Texas really need help is in statutory law. I am understanding that Administrative Code is where statutory law lies, that governs jails and prisons. Texas prisoners in state facilities are not privy to these laws, so a prisoner cannot successfully litigate a case without an injury. An injury is not a prerequisite to 42 USC 1983.

Well keep up the good work and stand united and strong.

MIM(Prisons) responds: Legal work and campaigns, such as the information contained in the Texas Pack, are one aspect of our struggle toward a society without the abuses that the Texas Pack is focused on: grievance problems, indigent mail restrictions, exorbitant medical copay, and others. We don’t think we can get to that society by focusing on just this angle alone, however. So we push our comrades who are getting good information from the Texas Pack to also recognize the bigger picture and the long-term struggle. MIM(Prisons)’s work is focused on prisons in the United $tates, but we strive for this work to coincide with the struggles of the most oppressed peoples in the world. If you’re ready to take that step from prison reformer to revolutionary, we offer lots of study materials on the topic, and a correspondence study course for $10 or work-trade.

In response to the article in ULK 55 titled “Correction to Deadly Heat in Louisiana Article,” I am equally compelled to struggle my point across to my Texas comrade and all other comrades within the jurisdiction of the 5th Circuit. Our Texas comrade has committed the error of “seeing only a tree instead of the forest,” please allow me to explain.

While it is correct that the 5th Circuit remanded the case back to the District Court with an order to apply the injunction to only the three plaintiffs in Angola’s death row – Ball, Magee and Code – if one would read and digest the discussion of the 5th Circuit’s ruling then one would see that it is obvious that in order for “all” prisoners to receive this relief then “all” prisoners would have to file! And I am fairly sure that most comrades can “come up” with a medical condition! In section 3 of the opinion under “disability claims” the court stated in the last paragraph that because the plaintiffs failed to properly introduce their ADA claims that it was fatal as to that claim, therefore “reading between the lines” one can grasp the nugget of wisdom!

So in conclusion there has been and is a victory against the deadly heat in Louisiana, so I urge all comrades to flood the courts with their own “personal” suits and bypass the stacked deck of the PLRA, entiendes? Please read the “entire” case with footnotes etc.: it was declared that the heat can be a violation of the Eighth Amendment. (The ADA provides “endless” major life activities and functions so everyone can find a niche). So if the heat is a violation of a federal right then – (quote from opinion) “such relief shall extend no further than necessary to correct the violation of the federal right of a particular plaintiff or plaintiffs!”

Be that plaintiff!

Please read the case: Elzie Ball, et al. v. James M. Leblanc, et al. U.$. District Court for the Middle district of Louisiana, 988 F. Supp. 2d 639; 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178557 Civil Action No.: 13-00368-BAJ-SCR. This is on order from Ball v. Leblanc, 792 F.3d 584, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 11769 (5th Cir. La. 2015).

MIM(Prisons) responds: In “Correction to Deadly Heat in Louisiana Article”, another writer responded to this writer’s original article on this lawsuit from ULK 53. The responder pointed out that the 5th Circuit Court’s decision only afforded people with pre-existing medical conditions relief from the dangerous heat in Louisiana prisons. And so ey clarified that the ruling does not automatically apply to all of Louisiana’s death row. We are glad that both writers chimed in on the topic, to clarify the ruling and the suggested tactics.

We need to think creatively about how to use this court decision to expand protections to anyone with any medical condition. In conditions like this that are truly dangerous (as we approach summer once again) we encourage people to follow this comrade’s lead and look for ways to use the legal system to improve safety of your conditions.

Perhaps others will disagree with this tactic and propose other better uses for people’s time and legal research. It’s slow to engage in debate through the pages of a bi-monthly newsletter like Under Lock & Key but this is beneficial to all readers and a part of the unity-criticism-unity process. It’s a healthy debate over tactics that will keep pushing our work forward, so write to us and let us hear your thoughts.

I’ma start this letter out by sending all my respects to all involved in educating and enlightening those who is fighting such as myself. These past couple of weeks have been very hectic. Here at Kentucky State Reformatory, we have difficulties with the administration denying legal help from legal aids on cases and with research and filing.

In Kentucky, prisoners in administration and punitive segregation are being denied legal representation by legal aides on filing motions, briefs, etc. and on research. Most of us have active cases and are filing new cases, but the administration have told us “prisoners” that the legal aides can’t assist us on any cases and they have notified the legal aides not to assist us on our cases. The legal aides have been told that they can only assist us and represent us at adjustment committee hearings.

Everyone knows that you have to and need to do research before an active case can even begin and finish, so this bureaucratic red tape is just another arbitrary denial of access to courts, and a violation of the Kentucky Constitution and the U.$. Constitution. Right now I am seeking out accurate factual materials to write out a petition to send to the warden, and accurate factual civil and human rights and constitutional Kentucky and federal laws to fight this injustice.

An injustice to one is an injustice to all.

MIM(Prisons) responds: This is not an issue unique to Kentucky. Prisoners in Texas are also being denied access to courts because of a “cite only” rule. And in Georgia our comrades are denied access to the courts because they are on Tier II restrictive housing. In North Carolina there are no law libraries, and the agency that is designated to satisfy the requirement of access to courts is almost entirely useless.

For all our comrades who advocate working through the courts for remedies, we have as many comrades who write in saying it is impossible for them to access legal material or assistance. This is one of many reasons why we don’t believe the oppressors will ever set up a system that grants real power or dignity to oppressed people, including U.$. prisoners. We work within the system when we can, but we also need to build our own independent institutions, outside the current criminal injustice system, in order to meet and maintain our goals.