Under Lock & Key

This is a response to an article titled “Black Liberation in the 21st Century: A Revolutionary Reassessment of Black Nationalism,” by the New Afrikan Black Panther Party - Prison Chapter’s Minister of Defense, Rashid. Rashid’s article has been published in a number of places.

My writing will not analyze Black Nationalism per se, rather it aims to address the “national question” itself. My position comes from a Chicano perspective, which I hope adds to the theoretical sauce surrounding the idea of national liberation and the development of the oppressed nations ideologically, whether they be from the Brown, Black or Red Nations here in the United $tates. In the contemporary prisoner, one sees an awakening to truth and meaning amidst a state offensive to deprive millions of humyn dignity and freedom. The roundups, ICE raids and fascist laws (reinforced with putting the data of millions of oppressed across the U.$. into the state intelligence files preparing for future revolt and repression) has added to the swirl of these times for people to become politicized, and prisoners are no exception.

The struggle in the ideological arena is just as vital as that with the rifle, and perhaps more difficult. Out in society – where people have more social influences – ideas, experiences and thought can bring more diverse views into the sphere of theory. Often times the prison environment, in its concentrated form and social makeup, has more limited ideological influences. This is a trap that prisoners should guard against in developing a political line. There will always be ideological “yes people” in prisons, especially amongst one’s own circle of friends or comrades. This could also be said of the limited contacts in the outside world that most prisoners have.

The “national question” is one that is not exclusive to the Black Nation; it is something that Raza and others are wrangling with as well. My critiques here are related to the national question in the United $tates in general, and not specific to the Black Belt Thesis (BBT) that Rashid addresses in his article.

In the section titled “The Black Belt Thesis and the New Class Configuration of the New Afrikan Nation,” Rashid describes comrade J.V. Stalin on the national question as follows:

The [Black Belt Thesis] was based on comrade J.V. Stalin’s analysis of the national question as essentially a peasant question. Unlike the analysis put forward by Lenin, and more fully developed by Mao, Stalin’s analysis limited the national question to essentially a peasantry’s struggle for the land they labored on geographically defined by their having a common language, history, culture and economic life together. Hence the slogan “Free the Land!” and “Land to the Tiller!”

Just to be clear, J.V. Stalin defined a “nation” as follows:

A nation is a historically constituted, stable community of people, formed on the basis of language, territory, economic life, and psychological make-up manifested in a common culture.”(1)

This definition continues to stand as what defines a nation today and to deny this is simply a deviation. Comrade Lenin was not alive to see the development of the anti-colonial struggles and thus in his view oppressed nations could not be victorious on their own accord, but Stalin taught us differently. At the same time Stalin also stated that should a people no longer meet any of these criteria of a nation then they are no longer a nation.

In this section, Rashid refers to a “Great Migration” of Blacks out of the rural south and across the United $tates, which he uses, or seems to use, as justification for not having “need of pursuing a struggle to achieve a New Afrikan nation state, we have achieved the historical results of bourgeois democracy…” Just because a people migrate across the continent does not negate a national territory so long as a large concentration remains in the national territory. For example, if the Mohawk nation continues to reside in the northeast but a significant portion of their population spread out “across America” and become urban dwellers, their nation remains in the Northeast no matter how much they wish to be Oregonians or Alaskans. But what really seemed grating in this section was the last paragraph, which reads:

To complete the liberal democratic revolution and move forward to socialist reconstruction the proletariat must lead the struggle which is stifled by the increasingly anti-democratic, fascistic and reactionary bourgeoisie. The bourgeois are no longer capable of playing a progressive role in history.

First, the proletariat in its original sense for the most part does not exist in the United $tates. In addition, the Trotskyite approach of relying on the Amerikan “working class” is a waste of time. Amerikan workers are not a revolutionary vehicle - they are not exploited when they are amongst the highest paid workers in the world. How can those seeking higher pay for more or bigger plasma TVs and SUVs be relied upon to give all that up for “socialist construction”? And my view does not come unsupported by the ideological framework that Rashid claims to represent. Engels wrote to Marx in 1858:

The English proletariat is actually becoming more and more bourgeois, so that this most bourgeois of all nations is apparently aiming ultimately at the possession of a bourgeois aristocracy and a bourgeois proletariat alongside the bourgeoisie. For a nation which exploits the whole world this is of course to a certain extent justifiable.(2)

So even back in Marx and Engels’s day the English proletariat was already bourgeoisified. Imperialism has developed far more since 1858, further concentrating the wealth disparity between the oppressor and oppressed nations globally.

In the section titled “The Revolutionary Advantages of Our Proletarian National Character,” the idea is put forth of “building a multi-ethnic, multi-racial socialist America.” Although I am not opposed to multi-ethnic organizing, I also don’t negate the usefulness of single-nation parties. One has to analyze the concrete conditions in the United $tates. The historical development of the social forces may not agree with this approach, and just because it may have worked in some countries it may not apply to this country. It obviously didn’t apply to South Africa, another settler state. In Azania the Pan Africanist Congress seemed to forward the struggle more than other groups, in particular the integrationist African National Congress that took power and changed little for Azanians. Huey Newton himself understood this, thus the Black Panther Party was a single nationality party, with internationalist politics. Of course, at some point things will change, but the advancement of imperialism and a long lineage of white supremacy and privilege remains a hurdle still too huge for real multi-ethnic organizing advancements at this time in the United $tates.

In the section “Separation, Integration or Revolution,” what is put forward for liberation is to overthrow “imperialism and play a leading role in the global proletarian revolution and socialist reconstruction.” This, Rashid states, is “our path to liberation.” This smacks of First World chauvinism. The International Communist Movement (ICM) will always be led by the Third World proletariat. The ICM is dominated by the Third World and our voice in the First World is just that, a voice, that will help advance the global struggle, not lead. The idea of First World leadership of the ICM is classic Trotskyism.

In the section “Reassessing the National Liberation Question,” in speaking of past national liberation struggles, Rashid points to them having an “unattainable” goal. Yet countries like Vietnam, northern Korea, as well as Cuba come to mind as being successful in their national liberation struggles. [China is the prime example of liberating itself from imperialism and capitalism through socialist revolution. Of course, Huey Newton himself eventually dismissed China’s achieving of true national liberation in his theory of “intercommunalism” that the NABPP-PC upholds - Editor]

Rashid goes on to say, “Even if we did manage to reconstitute ourselves as a territorial nation in the”Black Belt,” we would only join the ranks of imperialist dominated Third World nations – and with the imperialist U.S. right on our border.” Here it seems the idealist proposition is being put forward that an oppressed nation could possibly liberate itself to the point of secession while U.$. imperialism is still breathing. So long as U.$. imperialism is still in power, no internal oppressed nation will emancipate itself. So the thought of the imperialists being on one’s border will not be a problem as at that point in the struggle for national liberation imperialism will be on no one’s border.

In this same section, Rashid quotes Amilcar Cabral, who posed the question of whether national liberation was an imperialist creation in many African countries. Now we should understand that the imperialists will use any country, ideology or leader if allowed (Ghadaffi found this out the hard way most recently) but we should not believe that the people are not smart enough to free themselves when oppressed. The white supremacists put forward a line that Jews are in an international conspiracy creating revolution and communism. These conspiracy theorists look for any reason to suggest that the people cannot come to the conclusion to decolonize themselves.

Later in this section the question is asked if the “proponents of the BBT expect whites in the ‘Black Belt’ to passively concede the territory and leave?”

I’m not a proponent of the Black Belt Thesis, but speaking in regard to national liberation I can answer this question quite clearly. As this writer alludes to, there may be a “white backlash.” But in any national liberation struggle anywhere on the planet there is always a backlash from those whose interests are threatened. When the oppressed nations decide to liberate themselves in the United $tates the objective position of the reactionaries will be to fight to uphold their white privilege. This privilege relies heavily on the state and the culture of white supremacy in Amerika. So their choice will be to support the national liberation struggles, as real white revolutionaries will do, or to side with imperialism. But there will be no sympathy for oppressors in any national liberation struggle.

Asking the question of what do we expect whites to do is akin to asking the revolutionary post-Civil War, when many were cut off from parasitism, “well do you expect the people to stop exploiting ‘their’ field workers?” Do you expect Amerikan workers to stop being paid high wages gained through the exploitation of the Third World? Do you expect the pimp to stop pimping the prostitute? Do you expect the oppressor nation to give up their national privilege? To all of the above I say if it’s what the people decide, then YES!

Real white comrades not only will support the oppressed to obtain liberation in a future revolution, but most do so in their work today, even though they are a small minority compared to the larger Amerikan population. By that time in the distant future hopefully more people will have been educated and converted.

It is the task of conscious prisoners to develop a political line that propels the imprisoned masses forward via concrete analysis, not just of prison conditions, but of conditions outside these concentration camps as well. Oppression in imperialism is a three-legged stool that includes class, nation and gender. Thus we must develop our political line according to these concrete conditions. Our line should be grounded in reality. Our society is still very much segregated along class and national lines, particularly in the fields of housing, education and freedom.

Indeed, over half the people living within two miles of a hazardous waste facility are Brown, Black or First Nations.(3) In many high schools in the inner city Brown and Black youth are forced to share one textbook for 3 or 4 students, while their parents are jailed when they attempt to enroll their children in “better off” schools which unsurprisingly are predominantly white.(4) The prisons are no different, nor the “justice system.” Of the 700,000 who were reported to have been stopped and frisked in New York City last year, 87% were Latinos and Blacks even though whites make up 44% of New York City’s population.

When we develop a political line we must challenge it on a materialist foundation in order to sharpen things up in a positive way, but it must not be detached from reality. Only in this way will we identify what is palpable in the realm of national liberation.

As Lenin said, “it is fine, it is necessary and important, to dream of another or radically different and better world – while at the same time we must infuse and inform our dreams with the most consistent, systematic and comprehensive scientific outlook and method, communism, and on that basis fight to bring those dreams into reality.”

MIM(Prisons) adds: The original article by Rashid is in response to the New Afrikan Maoist Party and cites the Maoist Internationalist Movement as another party promoting the Black Belt Thesis. While MIM certainly never denounced the Black Belt Thesis, they recognized the crumbling material basis for seeing it through in the post-Comintern years that Rashid points to in his article. It is worth noting that more recent statistics show the New Afrikan population since 1990 has increased most in the South, where 55% of New Afrikans live today and that in the Black Belt states a much higher percentage of the population is New Afrikan than in the rest of the country.(5) MIM did publish an interesting discussion of the land question for New Afrika as an example of a two line struggle in 2004. Ultimately the land question must be determined by two conditions which we do not currently have: 1) a Black nation that has liberated itself from imperialism, and 2) a forum for negotiating land division in North America with other internal semi-colonies free from imperialist intervention.

In his article, Rashid responds to our critique of his liquidating the nationalist struggle in the book Defying the Tomb. In doing so he speaks of a Pan-Afrikan Nation, which is an oxymoron completely liquidating the meaning of both terms. Pan-Afrikanism is a recognition of the common interests of the various oppressed nations of Africa, often extended to the African diaspora. You cannot apply the Stalin quote given above to New Afrika and Pan Afrikanism and consistently call both a nation.

But ultimately, as the USW comrade criticizes above, the liquidationism is strongest in the NABPP-PC line on the progressive nature of the Amerikan nation. It is this dividing line that makes it impossible for our camps to see eye-to-eye and carry out a real two line struggle on the question of New Afrikan land.

MT 11 is a must-read, not just for the political- and class-conscious prisoner, but for all prisoners as a stepping stone on the road to liberation and sure footing to understanding the exact context of our imprisonment.

Beginning with the essay “Amerikan Fascism & Prisons,” MIM lays out the only real fascist aspect in Amerikan society - the Amerikan prison system. This work is indeed of exceptional relevance as MIM points to the economic motivation behind fascism as well as to the white petit-bourgeois element that breathes life into this most barbaric expression of capitalist production and its anti-revolutionary mission statement.

The article “Capital & State Join Hands In Private Prisons” further elaborates on the thesis that fascism is not just alive and well within the Amerikkkan prison system, but that it has been expanding since the 1980s in the private prison phenomenon, which is but the melding of capital and the state in the growing war against the oppressed nations, with the prerequisite and additional benefit of continuing to win over the middle classes to their side by ensuring them an always available form of employment.

“Prison Labor: Profits, Slavery & the State” then explains how the possibility of open slavery can come back full force thru the institution of the prisons as it was once manifested pre-Civil War. This article also speaks of the important political functions the prison system serves repressing in the national liberation movements and the further indoctrination of the labor aristocracy with fascist ideology.

Nothing however drives home the colonial relation between Amerika and the oppressed nations like the articles “Political Prisoners Revisited,” “Political Prisoners & the Anti-Imperialist Struggle” and “Who Are the Political Prisoners?”

“Political Prisoners Revisited” is a good example of the Maoist tenet of unity-criticism-unity in which MIM explains the basics of their line concerning prisoners in Amerika in a dialogue with the New Afrikan Independence Movement. MIM argues that the term “political prisoners” shouldn’t just be reserved for individuals such as Mumia Abu-Jamal or Leonard Peltier, but is more appropriately and powerfully applied to all prisoners. All prisoners currently incarcerated under the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie are rightly so political prisoners because the “laws” that we supposedly broke were laws specifically designed for the backing of the backward illegitimate political agenda of the superstructure and the settler state which it serves. To ignore or refute this point with respect to the entire imprisoned population and instead deflect the political aspect of this oppression to just a few individuals is not just a victory for the bourgeoisie but is itself bourgeois in essence!

“Political Prisoners & the Anti-Imperialist Struggle” centers on the antagonistic contradiction of Amerika vs. the oppressed nations that is reflected thru the prison system. It focuses on the material basis objectively present in the form of the gulag, and the material forces already present therein. MIM discusses the dire need for leadership to further help develop these potentially revolutionary forces to their logical conclusion, or in MIM’s words: “to unite all who can be united to smash imperialism and all its tools of oppression…”

MIM understood the process of rapid radicalization of “common criminals” as a profoundly political one and in their agitation they emphasized that process as reflecting the material basis for revolution as does MIM(Prisons) and USW. Unity on this point is therefore essential to re-launching the new prison movement in connection with the national liberation struggles which have been repressed and stagnated by the oppressors with mass incarceration.

Finally, “Who Are the Political Prisoners?” is a New York prisoner’s contribution and advancement to the MIM line on political prisoners in which s/he expounds MIM’s line in detail and in such a way as to leave no doubt that the growth of the prison system within U.$. borders is not just a boil, but a cancer on the oppressed nation internal semi-colonies that needs to be mercilessly removed!

MT 11 also contains, among other things, an essay on Malcolm X’s progressive development, a critique of Gandhi’s so-called “non-violence” and pacifist strategy and tactics, as well as some good theoretical works and revolutionary poetry.

For all these reasons combined, MIM Theory 11: Amerikkkan Prisons on Trial gets four out of four red stars.

And so with that i end this review the same way the New York prisoner ended his article:

Death and Destruction to the U.$. Empire!
Birth and Construction to the Prison Revolutionary Movement!

The Essential Stalin: Major Theoretical Writings, 1905-52
Edited with an introduction by Bruce Franklin

“…Stalin is clearly one of the three most important historical figures of our century, his thought and deeds still affecting our daily lives, considered by hundreds of millions today as one of the leading political theorists of any time, his very name a strongly emotional household name throughout the world.” - Bruce Franklin

These above mentioned words are as true today as they were when they were first written 40 years ago. The importance and relevance of Stalin’s great theoretical works were at the core of the international communist movement for damn near 90 years and should serve as a rock-hard foundation for any persyn serious about wanting to re-ignite the socialist fire that was ablaze for the greater part of the last century.

As successful as the imperialists have been in vilifying not just the world revolutionary movement but it’s once main proponent, they can never completely succeed in wiping the memory or more importantly the teachings and practice of J.V. Stalin from the minds of countless people around the globe. Yet the imperialists and their quisling lackeys such as Bob Avakian of RCP=U$A fame continue to desiccate Josef Stalin be it by “new”, “conclusive”, “secret archive” evidence or by the “new synthesis” method of attack. Therefore it is the duty of all the real revolutionaries to defend and uphold the practice of Stalin not just because it is integral to the successful practice of revolution as the people of Korea, Vietnam and Peru can attest to but because to attack Stalin is to attack the theory of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Mao as well; and the only way of doing this is to (a) study Stalin’s works and (b) put it into practice! and we will find that (c) without revolutionary theory there can be no revolutionary movement as practice gropes in the dark unless it’s path is illuminated by the most advanced revolutionary theory.

In my mission to learn the science of revolution I requested “The Essential Stalin” from MIM Distributors and must say with great certainty that my grasp of Marxism-Leniism-Maoism has been increased ten-fold thanks to my acquiring and diligent study of this most valuable Marxist-Leninist weapon of liberation. From the most intriguing introduction which is packed with such hysterical data that reads like the most vivid novel to “Marxism and the National Question”, J.V. Stalin’s first major theoretical contribution to the oppressed people of the world and to which any self-proclaimed revolutionary nationalist would be remiss not to study, to the “Foundations of Leninism” in which Stalin always the teacher clearly lays out not just the hysterical roots of the first truly successful revolutionary ideology based on Marx & Engels formulations which led to the worlds first socialist society, but in which he clearly relayed to the Soviet Union that they would stay the course set by Lenin; to “Dialectical and Historical Materialism” in which he explained the rudiments of Marxist philosophy and which was once considered required reading for all members of the Chinese Communist Party or “Marxism and Linguistics” where Stalin in replying to young communists properly put forward the place of language in the revolutionary movement while simultaneously critiquing the dominant Soviet “authorities,” i.e. revisionists, or “Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR”, Stalin’s criticism of “two extreme tendencies in Soviet political economy, mechanical determinism and voluntarism” which were propagated by the new bourgeois in the party who wished to cause the disappearing of man in socialist production.

Surely after leading this communist jewel you will find as did I why it was Mao himself who described Stalin as “the greatest genius of our time” and labeled himself as disciple of Stalin.

Studying Stalin however isn’t always the easiest task and requires deep thought. Rest assured however that by completely immersing yourself in Stalin’s work and undertaking a painstaking study of it you will be illuminated by the shining path put forward by comrade Stalin, and while he wasn’t always the perfect communist for the Soviet Union, he was the best they had and as a result the International Communist Movement flourished.

Long Live Josef Stalin!

Here we are in this endless cycle of genocide inflicted on the internal semi-colonies. Hunting season is never over in Amerika; it is merely covered up with different words to describe it. But those of us in prisons across Amerikkka understand what is taking place.

It has taken almost two full months for the arrest of George Zimmerman to be finally carried out. That’s sad, when a Black 17-year-old is executed in cold blood and the killer is allowed to roam free, but we are arrested for reckless driving and given a life sentence. U.$. soldiers slaughter villages, cut off ears, take photos of themselves urinating on the bodies, without being charged; and when they are charged they walk free. Migrants are shot and killed by white supremacist militia groups, and not only does the corporate media not report it, but bills are currently being pushed through that call for militia groups to formally work in concert with border patrol.

The truth is the state operates in a way that allows many loopholes and leeway for white supremacists to survive and continue their terror. This is seen in the treatment these groups are given from Amerika. If you look closely at this phenomenon it shows us what kind of a rotten system we really live under. The problem is we have been born and raised in this imbalanced existence so we now believe many things are “normal” or “okay” when in fact they are very wrong.

Case in point: the existence of white supremacist militia groups. If we were to have a handful of Chicanos with guns in any house we would be labeled “gang members” and the SWAT team would come in and crush our existence. If a handful of New Afrikans were at a house with guns and a flagpole flying their banner, they would be labeled terrorists and crushed. Yet there are entire compounds of white supremacists with guns and websites proclaiming their objectives, and for the most part Amerika leaves them untouched. Why is this? Well because these neo-Nazi or other white supremacists actually complement the imperialists’ agenda here in Amerika in many ways.

In one way they help to keep the mass attention off the state itself, but they also make room for the state to step in and appear as some savior. As in the Trayvon Martin murder, they allow this vigilante psychotic maggot to run amok, allowing the people’s anger to boil, and then step in to arrest him. This way many will think “they did the right thing” or “the law works.”

These tired old bait-and-switch tactics don’t fool nobody. We know Amerika is Zimmerman! Zimmerman is only a physical manifestation of imperialism. Imperialism, like Zimmerman, travels the world stalking Third World nations and then attacking the oppressed nation, latching on and sucking the blood, the resources, leaving a lifeless corpse in its place. They can call Amerika a “colorblind” society; they can allow the public to be “intermingled”; they can nominate Obama as president; but any way you slice it there is no justice to be found here for Brown or Black folks. Our justice will only come from our own hands through struggle.

Racism is generally understood by revolutionaries first and foremost as an outgrowth of the ruling class, which nurtures these white supremacists into fascist foot soldiers. They are imperialism’s reserve army and are intertwined with the state apparatus. They have a mutual interest in keeping things “the way they are.”

The most we’ve gotten out of Obama concerning this modern day lynching was him saying “if I had a son he would look like Trayvon.” Really? He couldn’t even make a speech denouncing the attack on Black people, the problem of white supremacy, or the new caste-like system that encourages these modern day lynchings lest he offend the oppressor nation. But saying nothing at all would offend the Black nation. His “middle ground” was “if I had a son he would look like Trayvon.”

These bourgeois politicians serve the ruling class, they serve capital, they serve Wall Street. Our justice may not come tomorrow but it will surely come, and until then let us prepare the people for the cold reality in Amerika.

“I was born in jail.” This was Stokely Carmichael’s response to a Swedish reporter in 1967 when asked if he was afraid of being sent to jail for helping to organize the Black nation for national liberation and self-determination.(1) In making this very poignant statement, Stokely Carmichael was putting forward the correct political analysis, referring to the prison-like conditions of the Black nation and other internal semi-colonies of Amerika at the time. It’s been 45 years since then and a string of reformist struggles have proceeded. The completion of the civil rights movement, the appointment of the first Black U.$. Supreme Court “Justice,” and the election of the first Black pre$ident. But have the material conditions of the Black nation truly changed when compared to other First Worlders? According to the Census Bureau statistics for the year 2006, which show more Blacks and Latinos are living in prison cells than college dorms, they have not.(2)

A new documentary titled “The Violence Interruptors: One Year In a City Grappling with Violence” makes this point ever-so-clear. This documentary centers on an imperialist-funded lumpen organization from the streets of Chicago whose membership is primarily made up of ex-gang members. For the most part they have all done some serious time for some serious crimes, but upon their release made a commitment to themselves and their communities that they would help stop the pointless violence that takes so many lives.

These ex-gang members call themselves “Violence Interruptors,” which is a reference to their pacifist tactics. They are funded by the Illinois Department of Corrections, Cook County Board of Commissioners and the U.$. Department of Justice, among others. They run the Violence Interruptors under the guise of the non-profit organization called Cease Fire. The initial idea of the Violence Interruptors program was proposed and partly funded by Dr. Gary Slutkin, who upon returning to Chicago from a medical tour of Africa saw the dire straits of the oppressed here and drew parallels to the African experience. But the organization’s true roots date back to Jeff Fort, whose life centered around his leadership in a Chicago lumpen organization that had one foot in Black nationalism and one in drugs and gang banging.

In federal prison from 1972 to 1976 due to his use of War on Poverty money from the government, Fort took up aspects of Islam and rebranded and restructured the Almighty Black P. Stone Nation when he got out. Along with other leading members, and at times working with the police, he worked to build peace between lumpen organizations and to keep crack out of Chicago. But of course the Amerikan government never likes to see the oppressed come together for the betterment of our people, even if at first they pretend to agree with what we’re doing. So they had Fort arrested and sent back to prison on trumped up terrorism charges, where he remains today. Having successfully neutralized Fort and other early leaders, the Stones today remain a largely divided umbrella for many sets of gang bangers across Chicago, the status quo preferred by the state.(3)

Carrying on Fort’s legacy, Ameena Mathews, a former gangster and Jeff Fort’s daughter, is a Violence Interruptor. Mathews, like other Violence Interruptors, is no stranger to the streets and sees it as her own persynal responsibility to stop the violence, even if it means putting her own life at risk. An example of this is caught on film when during an interview for the documentary that’s being given inside of her home, a fight breaks out on the street. Recognizing that even a one-on-one situation has the potential to turn deadly, she immediately rushed out to try and bring peace to the quickly-growing crowd. While attempting to calm everyone down, a young man saw a rock hurling at his cousin and sacrificially put himself in the line of fire to protect her. He was hit in the mouth. Afterwards threats are made with the promise of gunplay to come, but Mathews quickly ushers the victim away and tells him that he’s the real gangsta because he defended his family and defending their families is what true gangsters do.

Eddie Bocanegra, aka “Bandit,” is another Violence Interruptor who did 14 years for murder, but who, during his imprisonment, went thru a period of reflection. He recognized that he not only fucked up his life but that of his family and the family of the person he killed. Now on the streets Bandit admits to having identified pride with his gang but now sees that it was all pointless. Besides being a Violence Interruptor, Bandit also visits schools across Chicago in an attempt to counsel oppressed nation youth who might find themselves in similar situations to the ones he once did.

In the film, a delegation from South Africa requested to meet the Violence Interruptors during a recent visit to the United $tate$ in order to find out their secret to keeping the peace. Yet, the delegation became critical of one of the Interruptors’ policies, which is to never involve the pigs in the community’s affairs. The delegation argued that the Interruptors were not “neutral enough.” The Interruptors responded that this was the reason that they were so effective within the community, because the community knows they can confide in and trust the Interruptors with their problems without the fear of being sold out. Certainly the masses are correct to think this way. Problems that arise within the community should be dealt with by the community. To bring in the pigs is only to justify the oppression and occupation of the internal semi-colonies and oppressed communities. The potential problem we see with the Interruptors is that the state is happy to fund them as independent mediators for small meaningless violence, but how do the Interruptors deal with community organizations that are not state-funded, and may come into conflict with the state? The Interruptors present themselves as an independent force, but their funding tells us otherwise.

One indication of the Interruptors’ reputation with the community occurs when the family of a young murder victim receives word that his funeral is gonna be shot up by gang members looking for their original target. So seemingly effective and revered are the Interruptors that the murder victim’s family calls them to provide security instead of the police. At the end of the ceremony, Ameena Mathews gives a fiery speech in which she righteously calls out all the gang members in attendance and struggles with them to “get real” with their lives because that dead body they were all there paying their respects to was certainly real, and “it don’t get more real than that!”

While the documentary was being filmed, sections of the Woodlawn neighborhood, an epicenter of violent drama, came into conflict over a plan to militarize Chicago using the National Guard. The plan was developed by politicians with some members of the community. By building a real, independent peace in oppressed communities, we can eliminate the divisions within oppressed communities triggered by the wild behavior of lumpen youth and form a united front to keep the state’s occupation out. The section of the community that spoke out against the call for militarization knows that the National Guard will not provide more safety, only more oppression. This shows that just because the state has gotten smarter about how to control its internal semi-colonies does not mean that they no longer see the need for armed force.

Jeff Fort and the Almighty Black P. Stone Nation’s peace activism legacy lives on in the new federally-funded Violence Interruptors. Similarly, the once largely popular efforts of the Gangster Disciples to hold peace summits in Chicago has evolved into a project that works closely with the political machine of the state. Amerika has proven unable to solve the problems that have plagued the ghetto for generations. While Amerika was worried about what the Stones or the GDs might become, they were scared of what the Panthers already were. They drugged and shot Fred Hampton at age 21, while they eventually sent Fort and Larry Hoover to supermax prison cells with very limited contact with the outside world. While Barack Obama has thousands of people murdered across Africa and the Middle East, we see the level of criminality one must have to become a successful Black leader out of Chicago in this country. The imperialist-funded non-profits use pacifism for the oppressed, while painting mass murder for the oppressor nation as “spreading democracy.”

Many think that the Violence Interruptors have people power, but in fact they do not, for they wouldn’t even exist if they didn’t have the blessing of the oppressors. While the short-term goal of the Interruptors is to “stop the violence,” the long-term goal of the oppressors in creating the Interruptors is to stop the violence from spilling over onto themselves. They do this by not just co-opting grassroots attempts by the people to overcome their oppression and bring peace to the hood, but by creating organizations such as the Violence Interruptors which in the final analysis are nothing more than sham organizations; it is the bourgeoisie laughing at us.

In the Third World the bourgeoisie forms shadow organization and calls them “communist” in order to split the people and stop them from launching a People’s War. In the imperialist countries, like here in the U.$., they either co-opt or infiltrate and wreck those organizations already in existence. While the Panthers were given nothing but the stick, the Stones themselves were easily distracted from the path of the Panthers with the carrot of a little money from the War on Poverty. After destroying any independent mass movements, the imperialists allow and even encourage groups that promote integration or confuse the masses.

While it is true that there is only so much that we can do for the betterment of our class given our current position as oppressed nations within the belly of the beast, we must also recognize the importance of social consciousness on social being and stop letting the circumstances of our imprisonment both in here and on the street dictate to us the confines of our reality. We must come together and build our reality. We must come together and build our own institutions that are there to serve us; institutions of the oppressed. The Black Panthers had this power and we can too. We must learn to reject the bourgeois notion of power, which is only crude power and serves to oppress and exploit. This type of power is currently exhibited by many LOs, both in here and on the streets.

While commending those individuals within the Violence Interruptors who really are trying to do their part to stop the violence, we must also draw a clear line between fighting for self-determination of the oppressed and serving as the friendly face of the imperialist state. We need more allies on the streets doing this work in support of the efforts of MIM(Prisons) and USW in building peace on the inside. Only by building our own institutions of the oppressed will we truly be able to stop the violence that takes so many lives and keeps a substantial portion of oppressed nation youth behind bars.

Brown and Black Unite!
All Power to the Oppressed!

This is AR-15 of USW. My new LO’s name is Magnanimous Peace Manifesto Movement. As a lumpen organization, we are devoted in uniting together for world socialism and peace in prisons and the world beyond these walls and gates. We agree to uphold the statement of principles set forth by MIM(Prisons) and our fellow comrades in this United Front for Peace in Prisons.

As the founder of this organization, I began by addressing the needs that needed to be addressed in the control unit known as the “Intensive Supervision Unit” (ISU) here at the Cimarron Correctional Facility in Cushing, Oklahoma. I spoke to the contract monitor from the Oklahoma DOC and our unit team about what needs to be done in order for prisoners to succeed in our struggle for betterment.

One of the main issues was education amongst rehabilitative programs. A treaty was developed and the oppressor is going to provide the following:
1. Education for those prisoners who have educational needs
2. ESL for our Latino Nations; and
3. Rehabilitative programs, e.g. thinking for a change

This treaty has been placed into action as of 20 May 2011. To this end, revolution is on the rise!

The Magnanimous Peace Manifesto Movement was formed to promote better growth and development amongst our comrades. Though educational work is a part of our mission, we represent peace, unity, and growth. We believe that there can be no achievement without sacrifice, and a man’s worldly success will be in the measure that he sacrifices his confused-animal thoughts and fixes his mind on the development of his plans, and the strengthening of his resolution and self-reliance. He who would accomplish l title must sacrifice little, he who would achieve much must sacrifice much, and he who would attain highly must sacrifice greatly. MPMM is focused on reforms within all U.$. prisons because we’ve all (Lumpen Organizations) come together as a collective whole in a United Front for Peace.

We uphold the Statement of Principles established by MIM(Prisons) and other Lumpen Organizations in the United Front for Peace.

The recent article in ULK23 titled Hunger strike strategy: tactical retreat or advance? raised some good ideas on how to move forward in the struggle for human rights in Amerikan prisons. We need to propose ideas and theory on the situation with the strike movement now more than ever. We need to develop a clear path on how to better strengthen our efforts. This development needs not just California prisoner’s attention but all prisoners across the United $tates to lend their voice to this debate no matter where their cage is at as oppression can be found in every gulag from sea to shining sea.

When prisoners participate in this discussion, many are able to take from this debate, learn and hopefully add to it in a real way. Some may use the ideas for their own battles or modify other ideas to work in their efforts. In this way ULK will serve as a message board or chat room for the captive masses. All this is of course good and healthy for any movement to grow, and I look forward to read up on new theory and add to the mix as well. It is expanding on thought for all and a “win win” for the people.

One of the things that came out of the article “Tactical Retreat or Advance” was calling on certain people or LOs to provoke their participation. Had ULK been a strictly internal document that only prisoners read then I would think ‘yea right on.’ The problem is that ULKs are read and heavily scrutinized by prison officials and law enforcement agencies, thus what may mean to be simple criticism becomes a serious breach. In California prisons - and I suspect it is the same everywhere - if prison officials find letters, prison kites, etc., with prisoners names and affiliations this can be used as “confidential information,” “proving” what they will call gang association. This will go into one’s file to be used as a point toward validation. By naming aliases along with the name of a LO, all investigators need to do is punch in the alias and the database will list those suspected of affiliating with a certain LO and connect the dots. So listing names and LOs of people other than oneself is feeding intel to law enforcement which will be used to later put people in SHUs for decades or life. To name names and LOs is harmful being that ULKs go through kops hands before reaching prisoners. We should find ways to criticize our fellow prisoners while protecting their identity, it’s not hard to do so.

Someone who may be new to ULK may read the naming names and wonder, is this writer sabotaging these prisoners ability to remain on the mainline? Is he trying to get them snatched up? So we don’t want to give mixed messages to people picking up a ULK of what we’re about.

I know many people who were validated because their last point was someone else wrote something about them, that they were affiliated with this or that group, and so I was surprised this was allowed to take place.

I read awhile back in a MIM Theory about a comrade who was at a rally or event, and this comrade spoke about how someone walked up and said something like “hey you’re from MIM, I knew the founder so and so.” Well this comrade and MIM wrote something about security and how we shouldn’t name comrades as this information gets in the hands of agents. Of course I know the difference between a LO and MIM, yet a LO faces repression in prison in the form of SHU.

If there is a “pig question,” I think it begs the question of can there be a “pig statement”? It’s something we need to look at and see if there really is a breach in naming prisoners without their knowledge in ULK. What is the damage that can come out of this? And should MIM(Prisons) allow it or partake in the same? I don’t think so. I remember another article a while back where someone did the same and called out people and identified their LO but I believe it was in NY. I’m not sure how prisons in NY deal with intel such as this but I am certain of how California prisons deal with it and I am sitting in SHU for stuff like that.

I think MIM(Prisons) has an excellent policy of not putting peoples real names in its publications. MIM(Prisons) says rightly it does not do so to protect prisoners from more repression by the state. I believe this should also pertain to prisoners writing about other prisoners as well.

I think there is a way to call out LOs without naming prisoners, and it is right to call on certain folks to encourage participation, but naming names is just too harmful. When we write we must always keep in mind it is being read by not just guards but the larger state as well. I myself would not want someone to write about me by name if they are putting an LO beside my name. This is why MIM(Prisons) does not print real names. It’s a matter of security. The pigs get a lot of intelligence on prisoners from their snitches who help them out, they shouldn’t get more help from prison revolutionaries nor revolutionaries out in society.

I think criticism is a good thing for all prisoners and this includes LOs who are a huge part in what occurs in many prisons. Revolutionary prisoners need to develop ways to criticize without doing damage. Writing is not just succumbing to subjectivism no matter how stressful it becomes. I fully understand the frustration that arises when people are right at the ledge and all they need to do is make that leap to freedom and here we are the prison revolutionary nudging and showing the path and yet it moves at a snails pace and so we put pen to paper to jump start what seems like a stalled engine. I get this and see where we need to go but still we must remember ULK is not an internal cable, it is literally on the world wide web. Let us move forward in our efforts while staying alert in all areas. People’s Power!

Editor of MIM(Prisons) responds: We thank comrade Cipactli for calling out this error in Under Lock & Key, and as editor i fully accept the criticism made. While any potential damage in that instance has been done, we are printing this publicly to correct any bad impressions it may have given people and remind all comrades of the importance of these issues. This was an opportunist error on my part that risked pushing away people that we hope to ally with, who never asked to have their names in ULK.

MIM(Prisons) agrees that it is dangerous practice for ULK to include people’s LO name and affiliation and we will edit articles in the future to remove this information. While we have never printed people’s real names, as Cipactli points out, this doesn’t matter if the prisoncrats can make the connection between a prisoner and their LO name. We don’t need to be helping the state with their repression, and feeding them information can have a real impact even when we are printing common knowledge.

This doesn’t mean people should stop calling out LOs or writing about them, but ULK writers need to be careful to never use a name that can be associated with an individual. We can talk about groups without connecting them to specific names, and we can address lines and practice without naming groups. As we build the United Front for Peace in Prisons this is particularly important: we must build unity, not divisions, amongst the Lumpen Organizations.

I extend my greetings to you all and want to make a few observations based upon questions posed by Loco1 in ULK 23. It is quite true that we obtained the attention of prisoncrats who have assumed that the continual promotion of division of lumpen organizations will keep us at each other throats. Prisoncrats have adapted and pursued new oppressive tactics as a result of the intensive scrutiny that the shot across the bow of battleship CDCR caused.

To retreat is not an option, as to do such only further emboldens prisoncrats to erode civil and human rights of California prisoners, actions which will be mimicked across the nation. We must use our collective brains to adapt new tactics. In war many tactics are used. You may be able to sneak up on an enemy once or twice but in due course the opposition will counter with an ambush. So as master Sun Tzu stated in The Art of War, “Those who win every battle are not really skillful. Those who render others’ armies helpless without fighting are the best of all!” And that’s what was done, embarrassing the prisoncrats who were ill prepared to deal with it. It’s only a battle in a broader war.

I am nobody’s leader or follower. My duties are to help teach independent thought, which will ensure that an individual can and will anticipate the likely reaction of prisoncrats and minimize the effect. Everyone has seen the so-called increase of privileges, some of which are still very elusive, since they mandate a year without a disciplinary, which will never be possible for a true revolutionary or resister to achieve. These privileges also encourage prisoners to lean on their families and friends to help finance their imprisonment and enrich prison profiteers who feed on the golden state’s teat.

The original hunger strike strategy clearly impacted prisoncrats. It should provide a plethora of new tactical ideas. Consider that besides the so-called security concerns over prisoners possessing cell phones, the reality is that cell phones cut into prisoncrats’ fiscal resources. The prison phone provider gives the CDCR a concession fee. This is why prisoners’ phone privileges, canteen, packages and anything that the CDCR receives a concession fee from, are generally not taken. The income from canteen purchases pay the wages of state SEIU employees who are canteen managers II, I, supervisors and workers in addition to profits being diverted from prisoner welfare to custody welfare activities.

We should consider alternative strategies that hit them where it hurts the most: in their pocketbook. Just like one can go without eating for a week or three, people should be able to go without canteen for 3 to 6 months and empty trust accounts, which will result in more expense to the CDCR. There are numerous ways that the CDCR sticks it to prisoners’ families and friends. So if, as Loco1 suggests, it is correct to re-evaluate our actions, it is my opinion that the new strategy should be a fiscal one.

I address this to all prisoners irrespective of your status, as status is given by prisoncrats. Be you general population or sensitive needs, if you choose to allow prisoncrats to manipulate and control you with privileges, you are by proxy their collaborator. As such you cause as much of the problem, rather than a solution.

I also want to point out that tactically and strategically it is never wise to call out numerous lumpen organizations as BORO/Loco1 did. Such will likely have a negative impact, since those named will have to deal with substantively more scrutiny. So while others may think that ULK is a forum to send shout outs, to me the objective is to try to encourage education and the capacity to think independently. The CDCR benefits from dumbed-down prisoners, particularly those who do not have their priorities in order.

Prisoncrats look to pacify all prisoners, particularly the segment that is weakest. So it is on us to try to encourage self-esteem, self-worth, self-sacrifice and self-deprivation, all of which builds character and the ability to endure the picklesuits’ plots and conspiracies. The preparation that is most important to any struggle is the will to personally do something to encourage change. I believe that ideas and strategies of the opposition should be examined, and then we can decide on a course of action and systematically pass on the purpose and reasoning, not as leaders to followers but as men and women in concerted struggle.

The fact that there is no real accountability of prisoncrats and their subordinates has again led to the introduction of Assembly Bill 1270 on January 26, 2012 by Assembly Member Tom Ammiano to try to restore media access to prisoners. Taking away media access gave prisoncrats control over what’s spoon fed to the public. Independent media access is what made it possible for the pacification privileges introduced in the 60s and 70s, since there was a lot more transparency and prisoncrats were exposed to more accountability. But since the imposition of media restrictions on pre-arranged in-person interviews with prisoners, what takes place in prison tends to be out-of-sight/out-of-mind.

I believe in a United Front, but we must recognize that the composition of that front is varied. I prefer that we always seek to encourage education which brings clarity and understanding to less knowledgeable comrades. I will say, however that ignorance and stupidity is infectious. I guess I could be equated with a silverback, only I do not take to leading. But I am not adverse to the development of consciousness so maybe we should send requests to the education department of all CDCR prisons asking for “The Rise of the Planet of the Apes” that Wiawimawo provided us with a review of in August 2011, as it might help open up some minds to revolutionary concepts.

Yes I’m all for a true United Front, where we all (Black, Brown, White, Yellow, Red, Green, Blue or plaid) can stand together to regain our civil and human rights, not confusing privileges with rights. We can positively seek to cease all the senseless grudges that plague the ethnic divisions and LOs. I do not believe in violence just for amusement. My battle is not with prisoners, it’s with prisoncrats. Any prisoner who sees me as a threat, I deem them an agent of the state. “Think and not hate” is what your commentator in struggle relates.

MIM(Prisons) responds: First we want to agree with the criticism of calling out LO members by name which we already responded to elsewhere. But we do not agree with this comrade’s abdication of leadership. The movement has a strong need for leaders and pretending that all people are equal in this way gives power over to the imperialists who have no problem seizing leadership. Those who are more advanced, have more education, or more will to struggle, must take up leadership positions in educating and organizing others. We can’t afford to have these people step back in the name of equality as that void will be filled by reactionary leaders. The antidote to misleaders is better, more educated leaders as well as a better more educated mass that can judge, choose and reject would-be leaders. Ultimately we are working towards a society, communism, where all people are equal and all can lead, but we must deal with the current reality and uneven development of forces and individuals. USW is an organization for leaders. A vanguard party is the leader of the revolution. And the oppressed people desperately need more leaders.

Greetings to you no matter your affinity, association, involvement or activities in LOs or case status. There is a higher cause that demands our attention and support than being side tracked by petty conflicts or lack of prioritization.

As a result of some censorship by prisoncrats here at the infamous Corcoran SHU, only yesterday did I receive ULK23 after a two month delay. In the pages of ULK I see that the sensibilities of some SNYs have been ruffled.

This is not about attacking anyone’s sensitivities, nor is it about why any person chooses or allows themselves to be subjected to the indignity and dishonor of being classified as SNY while still trying to allude to being solid, which is illogical and demonstrates confusion.

Let’s be clear about the fact that whatever excuse one chooses to justify their conditions does not mean that I should sympathize or empathize with that individual’s decision or choice.

I take issue with the premise that General Population (GP) prisoners created SNYs since prisoncrats did that and CCPOA created prison politics and has nourished the growth. The fact that so many so-called GPs are quick to say in the presence of picklesuits or other informants that they are active for some false sense of machismo plays into the ploys of prisoncrats.

When I last sought to address this issue an SNY prisoner took offense even though nothing was directed at only SNYs, as I pointed out the fact that there are and have been a plethora of agent provocateurs and quislings in GP who are traitors to their own LOs working in lock step with the picklesuits.

As a prisoner of the state, it is not my job to inflict punishment on any other prisoner for the crime prosecuted by the state, that’s what a sentence is for and I am by no means a surrogate prisoncrat. In this day and age I do not draw a distinction between open SNY prisoners and undercover ones who suck up to prisoncrats and are motivated for the same reasons. Some supposedly solid comrades went to SNY supposedly to receive a release date, which to some may sound like a strong argument but to me is muddy water.

I do not have a duty or responsibility to provide IGI intelligence or a means of controlling the way I may think in exchange for a parole date; that is not freedom. Why concern ourselves with whether a cat hails from the north, south, east or west! I say white, black, brown, yellow or green! Why should I concern myself with what LO he/she claims to belong?

In most cases the need to publicly profess or denounce the appellation is a mental/emotional need, or a result of official intimidation to make decisions that individuals must live with. It does not mean that anyone has given up their usefulness and ability to support a prisoner’s cause!

Trust is not a given, nor do I give anyone the benefit of doubt just because they claim to be this or that. Trust is a hard won concept and only fools expose their personal inclinations and assume such will not be used against them by some character who is motivated by self-serving greed or malevolence. Even cowards, traitors, rats and deviants can try to make amends, but that does not mean such will regain trust and respect lost as of a result of ones choices.

The CDCR has found that the practice of intimidation, deprivation and manipulation works well on prisoners who allow themselves to become susceptible to such tactics and motivations to betray their comrades’ confidences. In my opinion this is inexcusable, but such is a mental/emotional weakness that’s identifiably been around since the beginning of civilization.

In these prisons many fail to acknowledge that 75% of the officially validated disruptive group members are based upon self-admission and/or public display of such affiliations, which include but are not limited to cats telling prisoncrats that they are this or that and so and so is my homeboy!

It is not for me to tell other prisoners what to do, and I do not have any qualms with sticking to morals and principals I grew up with, which means I will not take others down with me and I do not volunteer/provide the prisoncrats with intelligence on myself, family, friends, or people I may know. Why should I? What special consideration or privileges are that important? The problem is too many prisoners focusing on privileges rather than rights.

I am pursuing my own kind of sacrifice in that my prison term has been over since April 15, 2011. Parole is “an established variation on imprisonment of convicted criminal: the essence of parole is release from prison before the completion of a sentence on condition that a prisoner abide by certain rules during the balance of a sentence…” Yet prisoncrats have corrupted and confused the concept of parole to mean something more which while the Federal Bureau of Prisons jurisdiction adds a period of supervised release, such is not parole by definition.

Many prisoners tend to assume that my refusal to sign a parole contract is because I presumably have nowhere to go or have burned all my bridges. I have served all the time doubled and enhanced thus I should be allowed to leave the state and country if I so choose.

I am not at war with other prisoners and I am not into who-riding/who-banging or talking smack about others in what I see as intentional perpetuation of conflict and ethnic biases that keep us from maintaining a United Front in the face of the true demons who constantly attack and abuse prisoners with no real accountability, continuing the erosion and loss of civil and human rights.

I cannot and will not compromise my intellect and principals in exchange for a bigger prison where threat of re-imprisonment is used to try to end my activism for prisoner rights, justice and accountability of prisoncrats/picklesuits. This is my sacrifice in this multifaceted struggle, so GP/SNY whatever your circumstances may be there are many ways to contribute to the struggle and affronts to human dignity.

MIM(Prisons) responds: Overall this prisoner’s letter makes a good case for the point that prisoners in both GP and SNY need to be judged by their actions, not their prison-imposed label. And that we need to fight snitching and self-labeling everywhere. But we disagree with the conclusion that prisoners who accept SNY classification can’t be solid revolutionaries. There are those who move to SNY without ratting anyone out, to preserve their own life. They accept the SNY label as the lesser evil to the alternative of danger or even death in GP. We never know all the facts of these decisions and so we can only look to people’s actions, wherever they are, to judge whether they are true revolutionaries on the side of the world’s oppressed.

U.$. citizens are said to comprise a nation which embraces freedom. Freedom is said to be such a fundamental element of our nation that we insist on forcing our concepts of it upon other countries. The government coined a military mission “Operation Enduring Freedom.” The colonists declared war on the British in the interests of freedom; freedom was a major element in the fuel for the civil war; and the U.S. invaded Iraq to “secure” Iraqi freedom. Freedom seems to be the fuel to the fire of many struggles over the centuries in U.S. related matters.

Justice is also something that’s supposedly held dear in this nation. This Justice Department, along with its affiliates, is among the biggest governmental agencies in the nation. Our courts supposedly produce justice. People are murdered by the government, via capital punishment, in the name of justice. People are killed on the battlefield in the name of justice. Unarmed men are shot down in the streets by police, in the name of justice. Justice, as we know it here in the U.S., seems to be a grim reaper with a thirst for blood.

Sometimes what one says about their character is not always in harmony with their actions; the same is applicable to a nation. As the old saying goes, “Actions speak louder than words,” and I believe that the actions carried out by a nation’s government are the true indicator of what that nation’s principles and values are. Governmental action here in the U.S comes in the form of legislation, policy, enforcement, and rulings.

So despite what we say as a nation regarding how important freedom is, the question becomes: Are our actions in line with what we say? I think not and here’s why. We say that we cherish freedom. In fact our Declaration of Independence says that man’s freedom is an unalienable right, yet we have a larger number of people incarcerated than any other nation in the world. People will have many rationalizations as to why this is so, but from a purely objective analysis none hold up. Being the number one wielder of human captivity, while supposedly holding man’s freedom in the highest regard, are two totally irreconcilable positions.

Additionally, even as the Declaration was written and for years afterward, slavery was an accepted institution in this country. So while freedom was being formally recognized as a man’s inalienable right, certain men were being denied that very right. How can those two positions be reconciled?

Freedom, as defined by the Black’s Law Dictionary is: Quality or state of being free; liberty; independence

And Free is defined as: Not in bondage to another; enjoying liberty; independent.

Prisoners, slavery, excessive laws, our government seems to be the personification of the anti-freedom. Surprisingly many citizens seem oblivious to this paradox.

And who defines justice, being that it’s such a fluid concept. I mean, one person’s justice can be another’s injustice. In the interest of having a formal gauge, I’ll refer to the “Webster’s” dictionary for definition. Justice is defined: Uprightness; equitableness; fairness.

Now consider some of the actions committed by our government.

During the westward expansion of this nation, the government continuously laid claim to lands that they had previously agreed to leave to the First Nations. The First Nations were, for the most part, patient as Buddhist monks when facing these recurring betrayals. But even a priest can reach his boiling point, and when the First Nations reached theirs, the government resorted to forcefully taking the land. To take the property of another by means of force or fear is robbery. Robbery is a crime punishable by imprisonment/fine. This is not very much in line with justice is it?

Then think of the governmental approval of slavery in this nation. Not in regard to the actual practice of slavery but the fact that our government once deemed it acceptable and now denounces it. The key here is that despite the reversal, the government has made no restitution for this crime. No formal apology, no monetary compensation, or any “peace offering” to the New Afrikan nation.

In contrast, the German government has formally apologized and committed monetary compensation to the Jews for the Holocaust. And even in the United Snakes of Amerika, the government has started providing compensation to the First Nations. But I suppose that the decision makers in the government feel that Amerika is above any measures to make amends to mere “niggers.” (No offense to anyone in the New Afrikan nation, to which I belong. I simply use the word that the imperialists would in their reasoning). Yet they still boast Amerika as a justice loving nation.

And moving right along into more modern times, a focal point relevant to this subject is Amerika’s criminal justice system, which is contrary to the meaning of justice. For starters, studies have shown that Black nations and Latino nations receive harsher sentences and more severe charges in comparison with their caucasian counterparts. This is in regards to the very same or similar criminal acts.

A good example of this is the sentencing disparities between crack cocaine (mostly found in inner city, oppressed nations, neighborhoods) offenses and powder cocaine (generally associated with suburban, caucasian, neighborhoods). Despite the fact that the powder form of the drug has more of it than crack, five grams of crack will get one the same amount of time as about one hundred grams of powder cocaine. How absurd is that? There’s nothing just about a system that harbors racial disparity.

In the interests of promoting a safe and healthy society, the government has instituted the position of prosecutor. In their prosecutorial duties, the prosecutor is supposed to be bound by moral, ethical, and legal restraints. One of the main legal restraints supposedly binding the actions of a prosecutor is the constitutional “guarantees” that every defendant is supposed to have. In theory, a prosecutor must respect a defendant’s constitutional rights.

In reality, Amerika’s Supreme Court has deemed a prosecutor’s violation of certain constitutional “guarantees” acceptable. Therefore prosecutors don’t feel very obligated to respect a defendant’s constitutional rights. Add to this the fact that prosecutors have been granted immunity from civil liability in relation to their on the job misconduct. This basically give them license to disregard the law, having nothing upright, fair, or equitable about it.

There are plenty of instances which can illustrate precisely how unjust the so-called justice system is. Biased/racist judges and prosecutors, intentionally ineffective defense attorneys, discriminatory laws, all of these things help shatter the facade of legitimacy and justness of what is called the justice system. And ironically New Afrikans, the same people who were subjected to the inhumanity of slavery, are disproportionately targeted by the criminal “justice” system. It appears that the main facet of justice in Amerika is overt oppression. Amerika is the enemy of both freedom and justice.

MIM(Prisons) adds: A recent book review further highlights the true injustice of the prison system in Amerika. And overall this comrade makes a very important point about the hypocrisy of the U.$. claim to support freedom and justice. We will, however, point out that in order to achieve a society that truly affords everyone freedom and justice, we must first dismantle capitalism. And that will not happen overnight. For this reason, we support an explicitly repressive society called the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, which is a transition period between capitalism and communism where the government is run by the people and actively represses the freedom of the former bourgeoisie. We can not be idealists and think that it is possible to just magically conjure up a society where all are equal when those in power will fight to retain their power, and our culture teaches people to work first for individualist selfish goals. We will need years of retraining and re-education for people to truly work in cooperation for the common good.