MIM(Prisons) is a cell of revolutionaries serving the oppressed masses inside U.$. prisons, guided by the communist ideology of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.
Estelle Unit operates a “cite only” method of providing prisoners access
to courts, requiring prisoners to submit “cite specific requests” to
Access to Courts (ATC) officials in order to receive legal research
materials. Courts have repeatedly ruled cite-only access fails to
satisfy constitutional de minimis, explaining it is unreasonable to
expect a doctor of jurispridence to request cites by note, let alone a
pro se laypersyn prisoner.
Recently I was told by law library staff a case I cite-specifically
requested didn’t exist. I called bullshit stating the Texas Criminal
Practice Guide, John Boston’s and Dan Manville’s Prisoners’
Self-Help Litigation Manual, and Manville’s Prisoners’
Disciplinary Self-Help Litigation Manual don’t lie. I was then
threatened with disciplinary action. I invited such, desiring the denial
of access to courts be documented. The next day when admitted to the
so-called law library I was confronted by the ATC Supervisor in
possession of the case at issue, and all kinds of papers for me to sign,
validating I had in fact received the cite in question.
The very same day the above phantom caselaw was produced, I requested
another case by cite, and again told the case didn’t exist. I then set a
trap. I have repeatedly trapped and caught ATC pigs claiming
specifically-requested case citations did not exist which do indeed
exist. Case in point: I requested a denial of access to courts case per
the Estelle “cite only” method. I was told the case did not exist. I
waited a short period, then requested the supposed nonexistent case be
Shephardized, a method of cross-reference. At the next day’s so-called
law library session the Shephardized lexis.com download was presented to
me showing the case in question had been published in 1997. Priceless.
Absolutely priceless. Dumb blank faces blinking back at me.
MIM(Prisons) responds: The oppressors will never give the
oppressed the tools to overcome their oppression. This anecdote is an
example of exactly why we believe we need to build a revolutionary
movement to force the state to give up its power, so we can put an end
to Amerikkka’s prison system!
Issue 55 of Under Lock & Key is taking a deeper look at
building the United Front for Peace in Prisons at the margins. We’ve
already spent a lot of space debating the role people on Special Needs
Yards (SNY), especially in California. While that is an issue we will
need to continue to address, here we focus first on white nationalist
lumpen organizations, that are more likely to be on the mainline, and
how anti-imperialists might relate to them. We also have a few pieces
looking at the question of sex offenders who are generally seen as
pariahs. That topic is a subset of the SNY discussion. In this article
we will focus on the white nationalist question, and the question of
oppressed nations allying with whites in general. In many cases handling
this question properly will have a big impact on our success, because
there are a lot of white people in prisons and many of them team up with
white nationalist orgs.
One commonality across these examples is the need to consider how people
end up where they are. We print an example of
someone
taking sex offender charges out of expediency, and ey points out
that many such charges are flimsy. In some cases
sex
charges are politically motivated bad-jacketing. We will also see
many examples of people taking up white nationalism, to protect oneself
and also just out of a youthful ignorance, something many in prison can
identify with.
So there are a few principles of dialectical materialism that we should
apply in our analysis of groups which are often considered pariahs of
the revolutionary movement: 1) dialectics differs from metaphysics in
that metaphysics believes a thing has an essence; 2) dialectics in
contrast sees everything as always being in a constant state of change;
3) and we can best understand that change by looking at the
contradictions within that thing, while also considering the external
contradictions that may influence it (them). To put it another way, no
one is born a white supremacist or rapist, and just because someone’s
actions were that way in the past doesn’t mean they have to be in the
future.
What is White Nationalism?
Elsewhere in this issue we talk about
white
nationalism as an ideology that is a product of imperialism. Another
point we must stress when talking about white nationalism is it is the
majority ideology among the oppressor nation under imperialism. Most of
this issue will be dealing with extreme examples found in imprisoned
lumpen organizations. But there is a whole range of white nationalist
ideologies, and the lumpen organizations are not necessarily the most
extreme. Because the imprisoned lumpen are in the trenches, they must be
more scientific than the more privileged wings of the white nationalist
movement, and their motivations are often quite different.
In our current political climate in the United $tates, “white
nationalism” is a hot topic. It is being used to criticize President
Trump and those around em. But most of this criticism is coming from the
perspective that former President Obama was not a white nationalist. The
split between the left wing and right wing of white nationalism is about
how to best manage the oppressed, even when that is not how they think
about it. If we recognize that the current imperialist order is one that
puts whites in a position of supremacy, then we must conclude that any
position that works to preserve that system is white nationalist. Or we
may say Amerikan nationalist to avoid confusion when its proponents do
not appear white. But even though some internal semi-colony people are
sitting at the table, globally, white supremacy in the form of Amerikan
hegemony is alive and well.
Initially, the question of how and when to strategically ally with white
nationalists is a broad one, as it refers to how we might ally with the
majority of people in North America. But within that majority there are
different classes and political tendencies. And white nationalist
prisoners may be at the top of the list of likely allies from that
group.
Another argument for the importance of working with the white lumpen is
the Marxist analysis of the lumpen as a particularly dangerous, wavering
class. If this country is heading in a more fascist direction, white
nationalist lumpen youth and former military will be the first bases of
recruitment for the fascists. This concern applies to the lumpen in
general, but the national split makes it a harder sell for the internal
semi-colonies to take up fascism. As always, our strategy is to win over
all who can be won over, not to set false limitations based on identity
politics or preconceived assumptions.
More so than former military, the white lumpen have connections to the
struggles of the oppressed. And it is the massive prison system in this
country that we can largely thank for that. The modern prison system is
an inherent part of the modern ghetto, which has been lumpenized. While
segregation is stronger today in many cases in the ghettos, it is weaker
outside of the ghetto. This translates into a stronger class divide
within the oppressed nations. The extent of this divide in the white
nation is something that requires more research. But from the
information we have, white prisoners are much, much more likely to
integrate into petty-bourgeois society rather than be caught in a
ghetto-like situation upon release. But as long as they remain in
prison, whites do experience that ghetto life and the most brutal
repression that we have in this country.
Young Patriots, White Lumpen Revolutionaries
One of the best examples we have of white lumpen youth forming an
anti-imperialist organization was the Young Patriots Organization, which
started in Chicago in the late 1960s. Soon the offshoot Young Patriots
Party spread the movement to other parts of the United $tates. Their
example demonstrated both the potential and limitations of such an
organization. As long as there are pockets of whites that face similar
conditions to the oppressed nations, as they do in prison, a
revolutionary organization that can speak to and organize white lumpen
will strengthen the cause of anti-imperialism. However, the Black
Panthers, in particular Bob Lee and the leadership of Fred Hampton,
played a very hands-on role in the development of the Young Patriots. In
general history does not lead us to expect revolutionary white
organizations with correct political lines to take hold in North America
without good examples from the internal semi-colonies.
Even after becoming established, the Young Patriots were very limited by
the reactionary nature of their own nation. The Patriot base was
displaced southern whites who ended up in urban ghettos; a much smaller
group, but parallel to the New Afrikans who made the Great Migration.
When the Patriots returned to the south they were not received well. Two
of the members were killed shortly after returning to the south, because
of their organizing.(1) In other words, we are looking at exceptions to
the rule where there are pockets of whites who are both separate from
the oppressed nations but still living very similar lives and in
proximity to them. When Peggy Terry of the Young Patriot-associated
organization Jobs or Income Now (JOIN) ran for vice president, with
Black Panther Eldridge Cleaver as the presidential candidate in 1968,
they received a mere 28,000 votes in California. In contrast, the openly
racist George Wallace campaign got 500,000 (almost exclusively white)
votes.(2) And finally, for most of their existence the Patriots had more
spies watching their organization than they had members.(3) This
security issue is something others have pointed out with white
nationalist lumpen organizations in prison that can be
swimming
with federal agents.
Often the Panther rhetoric spoke of the Young Patriots as representing
“white power” in a way that was parallel to the Panthers’ “Black Power”
and Young Lords’ “Brown Power”. While we generally disagree with that
line, the Panthers later called out all other white groups as “fascists”
with the exception of the Patriots. The Patriot culture flew in the face
of the rest of the white anti-war and student movements, including their
confederate flag logo. We might draw a parallel to the Lucasville prison
uprising in Ohio in 1993, where it is reported that swastikas, lightning
bolts and words like “Supreme White Power” appeared alongside graffiti
throughout the prison saying “Black and White Together” and “Convict
unity.”(4) These white identities, historically associated with power
over New Afrikans were transformed in these unique circumstances.
Racism as a Tool of the Oppressor
MIM(Prisons) is cautious about presenting racism as merely a tool of the
imperialists to divide “the people” as that is the line of the
revisionists who claim that the majority of people in the imperialist
countries are proletarians that must be united in their common class
interest. As the practice of the Young Patriots demonstrated, this is
not the case. However, in prisons is where we see the greatest potential
for a class unity with whites that is progressive in the United $tates.
And in prison, it is certainly true that racism is a tool that is
actively used by the administration, even if often times white
nationalists are too willing to play the role of keeping other prisoners
in line for the state.
Of course, not all white prisoners are part of overtly racist lumpen
organizations. Former-Black-Panther-turned-anarchist Lorenzo Komboa
Ervin documented the history of the federal penitentiary at Terre Haute,
Indiana, which was transformed from a completely Ku Klux Klan-dominated
facility to one where New Afrikans built power in alliance with white
prisoners. Ey argues that the anti-racist whites, often imprisoned for
anti-war activities, were able to re-educate other white prisoners where
non-white prisoners would not be able to.(5) This is an example of the
importance of white-specific organizing, though not on the basis of an
outward white nationalism.
We must reach people where they are at in a segregated society. We saw
this with the Panthers in Chicago who were viewed with great skepticism
by the white residents of Uptown, but were welcomed by the Young Patriot
leadership. We saw this in Lucasville, where the New Afrikan leaders
picked Aryan Brotherhood member George Skatze to stand with them as a
representative of white prisoners because of eir history of settling
disputes between whites and New Afrikans.
“At some point on this first day George saw a black inmate (Cecil Allen)
talking through a bull horn to a small crowd of other prisoners. George
went up to listen. To his surprise the man on the bull horn pointed to
George and said, ‘There’s nobody going to be talking to you guys but me
or this man right here,’ meaning George Skatze.”
Accepting
their request for help, Skatze later “approached the whites, who were
sitting in the bleachers. Putting his arm around a black inmate George
said, ‘If the guards come in here they’re going to shoot us all, no
matter what color we are.’ We asked George who that black man was. He
said, I don’t know; I had never met him before.”(6)
Veteran of the first wave of the California prison movement, Kumasi
describes one scene in the late 1960s where hundreds of prisoners
circled around the yard chanting, “Power to the people! Death to the
pigs!” Approaching the group of white gangsters on the sidelines ey
framed the situation as “are you going to be with us or with the pigs?”
And since the reality reflected eir statement, they sure didn’t want to
be seen as siding with the pigs. As the whites started to join the ranks
of the protestors, Kumasi grabbed one of their hands and raised it in
the air as they faced the warden. In a segregated society this sort of
representation of different nationalities can have powerful effects.
Kumasi has a number of stories about organizing across nationality.
Similar to today, the California system was very segregated back then.
Various white power and nazi gangs existed, as they do today. The united
fronts Kumasi forged with these groups were not long-term and could be
quite impulsive. It was really the strength of eir own organization that
pushed others to come along. A justification of the line that building
up one’s own national unity helps build up the united front. Because the
movement for change had reached such popularity and support among New
Afrikans, it was easier to get the Chican@s to join up (who had not yet
been divided between north and south).
A USW comrade has this to say about organizing in California today:
“There has been times when we’ve done alliances with white nationalist
groups in prison. Any time we had a common goal, say shutting down SHUs,
or removing informants off yard, assistance with legal work and what
not.
“The only way for this to function is by creating a different set of
politiks/policies than those used amongst the other LOs. As long as it
does not interfere with the LOs’ goals to end oppression. It is my
opinion that even when dealing with oppressor nation LOs we must keep a
move ready to be made once achieving certain goals due to the history
the oppressor nation LOs have and because of their values as humans. We
wouldn’t like to see the LOs of the oppressed be set back a step or two
after gaining ground. I think that even unity of some form can be
achieved with pariahs – taking into account what they’ve done and what
they are willing to do to not only redeem themselves but to benefit the
struggle even at the cost of sacrifice. There is a place, space, form
and energy for everyone in a struggle. It is our responsibility to
organize, learn, and organize again.”
What these histories demonstrate is that in cases where the white
nationalists aren’t completely in bed with the pigs, they tend to see
themselves as prisoners and the pigs as their foes, like everyone else.
And it is the unity around demands for all prisoners, ones that are
nationality-neutral, that we will see opportunities for united front. So
while national unity may need to come first, class unity will always be
important in the prison movement.
White nationalism in general, whether of the left-wing or right-wing
variety, is based in an alliance with imperialism. But there are
examples in history of portions of the white population in the United
$tates who may have overt racist overtones without the attachment to
imperialism. Or at least with a mixed relationship to imperialism. And
in many cases this racism is more motivated by fear of the other, or
just self-protection than it is any deep investment in racist ideology
itself. The AB comrade who wrote
“The
Enemy of my Enemy” seems to be an example of this white nationalism
based in youthful ignorance. And the experience of the prison system has
given em the opportunity to learn about the lives of the oppressed, and
to live that life emself. George Skatze from Lucasville was also an
example of this, someone who stood with New Afrikan prisoners and
literally put eir life on the line in the struggle for prisoner rights
and then later at the hands of the state when ey was one of the comrades
who did not make a deal with the state to avoid death row as some of the
charged prisoners did.
While others suggest we fight racism as a way to end oppression, we say
to fight oppression to overcome racism. And in some cases oppression
itself will overcome racism, by uniting those once divided by ideas of
race. Our ideas are a product of our material conditions, and in
participating in the transformation of our conditions our ideas change.
There was an entry in ULK 53 I am compelled to address under the
heading
“Deadly
Heat Victory in Louisiana.” It was erroneously reported the 5th
Circuit ruling in Bell v. LeBlanc, 792 F. 3d 584, mandated the
temperature be maintained “at or below 88 degrees in Angola’s death row
buildings.”
Not so. The 5th Circuit held the U.S. District Court Middle District of
Louisiana ruling encompassing all of Louisiana’s death row overly broad,
and therefore an abuse of the District Court’s discreation, violation of
the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA). The 5th Circuit pared down the
District Court’s ruling to affect only the three named plaintiffs: Elzie
Ball, Nathaniel Code, and James Magee. The only reason the 5th Circuit
upheld the District Court’s ruling as pertaining to these three
plaintiffs is because all three are afflicted with pre-existing medical
conditions that are susceptible to heat-induced complications.
“Based on its findings of fact, we affirm the district court’s
conclusion that housing these prisoners in very hot cells without
sufficient access to heat-relief measures, while knowing that each
suffers from conditions that render him extremely vulnerable to serious
heat-related injury, violates the Eighth Amendment. … The district court
also erred because it awarded relief facility-wide, instead of limiting
such relief to Ball, Code, and Magee. … Because the district court’s
injunction provides an unnecessary type of relief and applies beyond
these three Plaintiffs, it violates the PLRA. Accordingly, the district
court abused its discretion. … We emphasize, however, that the finding
of substantial risk regarding a heat-related injury is tied to the
individual health conditions of these inmates.” Ball v. LeBlanc,
792 F.3d 584, 596-600, FNG.
The 5th Circuit opined Ball, Code, and Magee could be housed in cells
closer to the death row guards’ station, which is air conditioned,
thereby cooler than the remainder of death row cells. Or, at most, a
single death row tier could be air conditioned as a heat-relief measure
for prisoners similarly situated to Ball, Code, and Magee. But as for
requiring the Louisiana Department of Corrections to maintain
temperatures below 88 degrees at Angola’s death row altogether, the 5th
Circuit judged that was not necessary to comport with the Federal
Constitution.
Moral being, if it sounds too good to be true.. perhaps MIM(Prisons)
should submit to me these litigous tidbits for vetting and verification.
MIM(Prisons) responds: Thank you to this comrade for setting the
record straight, and helping to keep our subscribers from venturing down
a wrong path in seeking their own relief from extreme heat, especially
as summer is fast approaching. We rely on our subscribers to share their
knowledge with us, whether it be their legal expertise, organizing
experience, or theoretical understanding. Everyone should be making an
effort to increase our collective abilities, which our oppressors try so
hard to eliminate.
There are some good examples of united fronts between oppressed and
reactionary groups in the history of the United $tates. Some of which
ended up serving the interests of the oppressed and some which
ultimately hurt the oppressed. We find a few of these examples described
well in the book 500 Years of Indigenous Resistance available
from PM Press.(1)
First the case of the fight between the British and the emerging United
$tates of Amerika.
“In 1812, using the pretext of Native raids along its northern frontier
from British territories, U.S. forces attempted to invade British North
America. Here again, Britain’s colonial policies proved effective; an
alliance of Native nations (who had their own interests in full
implementation of the 1763 Proclamation [which prohibited settlement
west of the Appalachian mountains following the French and Indian War])
and European settlers succeeded in repulsing the U.S. expansion.”(p. 29)
As we have seen since 1812, the victory of the United $tates in the
Revolutionary War did not serve the interests of the First Nations. So
the First Nations definitely chose the right side in this battle, even
though the British surely had no real interest in supporting the rights
of the First Nations beyond what was necessary to gain their support.
This is an example of identifying the principal enemy and building
alliances against that enemy, even if those alliances are with groups
that would be enemies in other circumstances. This united front is
similar to the alliance between the Kuomindang and the Chinese
Communists in the war against Japanese imperialism. Ultimately the
Kuomindang betrayed the Communist Party, but at the time Japan was the
principal enemy and fighting together in a the united front was the
right choice to achieve the ultimate goal of establishing a socialist
state.
Another example is found in the U.$. Civil War, which was used by
Afrikan slaves to fight for their freedom. It was not a case of whites
going to war to help end slavery, but Afrikans were in a position to
force this issue to the forefront.
“The beginning of the U.S. Civil War in 1861 posed various problems for
the northern Union ruling class. Not only was the war for the
preservation of an expanding continental empire, but it also opened up a
second front: that of a liberation struggle by enslaved Afrikan peoples.
With a population of four million, the rising of these Afrikans in the
South proved crucial in the defeat of the Confederacy. By the tens of
thousands Afrikan slaves escaped from the slavers and enlisted in the
Union forces. This massive withdrawal of slave-labour hit the Southern
economy hard, and the Northern forces were bolstered by the
thousands.”(2)
In the aftermath of the Civil War, Afrikans in the South correctly
identified a shift in their principal enemy. It was no longer time to
ally with Union forces. With the ending of the war these slaves were
about to lose their bargaining position as fighters in the Union army.
“Towards the end of the War in 1865, those Afrikans who did not escape
began a large-scale strike following the defeat of the confederacy. They
claimed the lands that they had laboured on, and began arming themselves
– not only against the Southern planters but also against the Union
army. Widespread concerns about this ‘dangerous position’ of Afrikans in
the South led to ‘Black Reconstruction’; Afrikans were promised
democracy, human rights, self-government and popular ownership of the
land. In reality, it was a strategy for returning Euro-American
dominance….”(p. 40)
This shift resulted in a better deal for former slaves than they would
have got by just passively sticking with their unity with the North. But
it shows the need to complete the New Afrikan war for liberation from
the United $tates to achieve the basic goals of the Afrikan soliders who
freed themselves from slavery. Different conditions will require
reevaluation of who is our principal enemy and what are appropriate
united front strategies at the time.
Recently we learned that one of our readers and a long-time activist,
Zero, had a letter published on the
Anarchist Black Cross Portland (ABC PDX) website and in the
Incarcerated Workers Organizing Committee (IWOC) newsletter responding
to an article in Under Lock & Key No. 50 (May/June 2016)
about the
September 9 work stoppage. Zero invited us to respond publicly and
so we have done our best here to distill this debate down to what we see
as the most important points.
With IWOC, ABC, and Zero, we have a common enemy in the criminal
injustice system and imperialism more broadly. We are writing this
response with the goal of building unity, not division, between
organizations and individuals that are working hard to fight this unjust
system.
Anarchism vs. Communism
Fundamentally we have a disagreement over anarchism vs. communism, but
we believe that both camps are fighting for the same thing at root: an
end to oppression of groups of people by other groups of people. We just
think that communists have a more scientific plan for how to get there
than anarchists, based on our study of how these same efforts have been
attempted, succeeded, and failed in the past. The oppressed people of
the world deserve the best and fastest route to liberation. Communists
hope to discover what that route is through not only our study but also
our practice.
This disagreement over the importance of science to revolutionary
struggle is highlighted in a lot of what Zero wrote. Ey accuses
MIM(Prisons) of being intellectuals whose “theory is based in theory.”
Zero also claims to have no interest in political line in the
development of the September 9 work stoppage: “I don’t care what your
line is, nor does anyone else I work closely with on this project.
Beyond small friendly jabs at each other, nothing I’ve seen or read, or
heard from anyone in this campaign suggests anyone cares much about
line.”
Yet it’s a discredit to the hunger strike organizers to say that they
don’t care much about line. It is precisely political line and
theoretical analysis that drives the concept that “prisoner labor is
slavery and this mass work stoppage is a good plan to shut down
prisons.” Without unity on this analysis, the organizers might have
decided (as an example) the best approach is for everyone to fast
because the Amerikkkan farms depend on prisons to buy agricultural goods
and so this boycott would shut down the farms and hence force prison
reform. IWOC and ABC aren’t suggesting this, and that’s probably because
of their correct theoretical understanding of agriculture in this
country. In forming their alliance on this campaign, Zero, IWOC, and ABC
at least agree on this political line, even if they don’t talk about it.
After all, they are all anarchists (or anarchist-led), so they have much
unity on line already.
Zero finds “contradictory statements” in our original article that help
demonstrate where we depart from the anarchists because our strategy
differs from theirs. Zero wrote:
“In paragraph #5 you say: ‘we do see power in the ability of prisoners
to shut down facilities by not doing the work to keep them running for a
potentially longer period’. But then in paragraph #10 you say ‘the
organizers of the anti-slavery protest are misleading people into
believing that shutting down prison work will shut down prisons’.
If masses of prisoners stopped working, forever, some facilities may
close. This would likely be because of where they’re located
geographically, the layout and security level of the facility, and how
easy or difficult it is to staff the prisons to accommodate for the loss
of labor. But would that close all prisons in the United $tates? We
doubt it. Does that mean we think prisoners should all just keep
working? No! Short of overthrowing capitalist Amerikkka’s power
altogether, we will still have prisons in this country based on national
oppression. But making that oppression more difficult is always a good
thing.
Our point is that Amerikkka is willing to spend a lot of time, money and
resources on imprisoning a staggering number of people, all at a
financial loss. So we do not see evidence that if prisoners stop working
and it suddenly becomes more expensive to imprison people that that will
shut down the prison system. It most certainly is a form of resistance
that heightens the contradictions between the oppressed and the
oppressor, and even within the oppressor camp. Such an act would
certainly have great influence on the ever-changing realities within the
U.$. criminal injustice system, as would any sustained, mass prisoner
mobilization.
Elitism?
Zero criticizes MIM(Prisons), “You spell united front with capital ‘U’
and ‘F’ which is what MIM calls one of its programs, short for UFPP, and
as [UFPP] makes specific ideological demands for any entity it is
willing to work with, I’m led to believe that what you truly mean by
‘work with’ is to ‘co-opt’.” We do capitalize the name of the
organization United Front for Peace in Prisons (UFPP), which has a
specific program (the 5 Principles of the UFPP: Peace, Unity, Growth,
Internationalism, and Independence). Organizations that agree with those
principles but disagree with us on many other things have joined this
United Front and there is no attempt to co-opt those groups. We do not
capitalize “united front” when not talking about this specific
organization (if we have in print it was a mistake, not a political
point). This is not a problem of elitisim, it is simply grammar. We
welcome the development of a united front against prisons, and even
better a united front against imperialism, outside of the UFPP and not
bound by its 5 principles. But we do believe that united fronts need to
have clear points of unity so that there isn’t a question of
organizations being forced to change their political line or give up
their independence to participate. In other words, we are actively
trying to organize in a way to prevent the co-opting of organizations
that Zero accuses us of attempting.
Zero goes on to say that MIM(Prisons) “… refuse[s] to even mention the
names of these other revolutionary organizations so that your readers
can reach out and seek information on their own. Another display of
elitist hegemonization of line.” Yet this comment is in the context of
criticizing an article that specifically named the IWOC and included a
link directly to its publication, so we’re confused about where we
failed to mention the other organizers’ names. On this point, however,
we did fail to convert the web address to a print address in our print
version of ULK, which of course makes it harder for subscribers
to reach out directly to IWOC, and we are correcting that mistake in our
footnote to this article and our general practice. We actually print
many articles debating theory and practice, including some that
explicitely disagree with us. To be clear though, the purpose of
ULK is to educate and inform people on what we see as the
most correct political line and practice and so we always offer our
response to those points of disagreement and allow our readers (and
history) to decide who is correct.
On this same point, we also highlight the correct practice of our
predecessors in the Maoist Internationalist Movement (MIM) who
distributed a pamphlet “What’s Your Line?” with the names, addresses and
political positions of a wide spectrum of political organizations. We
haven’t put the time or money into compiling a similar up-to-date list
because our resources are sadly limited, but we still support this
practice. Perhaps an innocent oversight, but neither the ABC nor the
IWOC bothered to link to our website or print contact information for
MIM(Prisons) alongside Zero’s long and scathing critique of our
organization.
Nihilism or Subjectivism
In eir argument against political theory Zero writes: “I’m an anarchist.
More, a nihilist. … In the words of Bakunin, the true revolutionist is
concerned with the science of destruction. Let the other sciences be the
work of future generations. … And as Bakunin said, sometimes we just
have to throw theory into the fire, for it only stalls life.” It’s great
to have faith that humynity can work out the problems of the future, but
the problems of today also require scientific analysis. The oppressed
don’t have the luxury of banging their heads against the wall for years
failing to make progress. If historical revolutions have failed in the
same way repeatedly, we need to learn from those mistakes. And if
revolutions have succeeded with certain practices, we should learn from
those. This is what theory is all about: learning from history and
applying those lessons to our practice today. Then looking at our own
practice, drawing conclusions, and adapting our approach.
Citing Webster’s dictionary and dictionary.com, without acknowledging
the class interests that those resources represent, and saying “that’s
good enough for me” is simply subjectivism. Denying the importance of
theory to our practice is to make us slaves (pun intended) to our
emotions and subjectivism, which are very thoroughly conditioned by our
residence in an imperialist country. We cannot expect to overcome
subjectivism 100%, but through applying dialectical and historical
materialsm we hope to make the fewest errors in our revolutionary work
as possible.
Zero gives a good example of theoretical analysis in eir criticism:
“In closing, let me clarify that dialectical soundness can often depend
on interpretation. You all use orthodox marxist definitions of ‘slavery’
even though we live in a post-modern, post-fordist time and place. The
dynamics of our current reality are different. And so we must also
re-assess our definitions. Besides, though personally I use marxist
formulas I’m ultimately a nihilist, un-beholden to an particular
ideological parameters. In other words. My definition of ‘slavery’ is
reflected by our material conditions, not political agenda.”
Zero is correctly stating here that we must adapt our theory to current
conditions. What held true in Marx’s day may not be true today. We can’t
just get stuck in what Marx wrote and ignore changes in conditions. We
agree with that. But we ask Zero, what is it but theory that allows us
to discuss who is or isn’t a slave? If this discussion isn’t based in
theory, then it’s just subjectivism.
For example, here is an instance where MIM(Prisons)’s analysis has
adapted to changing conditions since Marx’s day. We see that while the
vast majority of workers of all countries were exploited in the past,
and made up the proletariat class that Marx wrote about so thoroughly,
today imperialism has advanced to the point where workers in imperialist
countries are mostly petty-bourgeois. This is a point where we tend to
disagree with groups who organize people in the First World around their
economic interests (as opposed to national interests).
Finally, demonstrating the difficulty in remaining anti-theory while
discussing political theory, Zero critiqued our point that work strikes
will not in-and-of-themselves bring down the Amerikan criminal injustice
system: “I’d ask on what dialectical evidence you base your theory that
america would ‘figure out’ how to keep us locked up.” This is a good
example of the importance of theory. If we’re wrong, then we should
focus our efforts into organizing work stoppages. And Zero is right, it
is dialectical materialist analysis that will help us figure that out
here. The article that Zero responded to actually went into a lot of
depth on this very point, explaining that prisons are primarily tools to
control society, not make profit, which aid in the oppressive force of
the bourgeoisie by keeping lumpen and anyone deemed dangerous to their
power locked away. We know that prisons are not reliant on the money
made from prisoner labor, because there is public information showing
that
prisons
are money-losing operations.
Political debate is not the same as political opposition
To clarify our position, in the original article about the September 9
protests we talked about the similarities and differencess between the
five-year history of the United Front for Peace in Prisons September 9
Day of Peace and Solidarity, and this newer call for prisoner activism
on September 9: “First we want to say that we are always happy to see
people taking up organizing and trying to build unity behind bars. There
are some very good points taken in this call to action… we would hope to
work with these folks to broaden our movement.” We followed this up with
multiple articles reporting on the work stoppage and praising the
widespread protests.
But Zero seems to think that by publically criticizing an incorrect
point of political theory from the organizers we are opposing the
protests. Ey wrote
“What we have here is a huge social base, across prison walls, that is
extremely pissed off. And we have an opportunity to harness that anger
and point it at our enemy on September 9th, thats all the analysis I
need. and I say that if you oppose this in any way, you’re nothing but a
house slave ready to defend your master. your complicit and should be
among the first to be taken to task.”
If we won’t just blindly agree and follow eir leadership, apparently we
are written off as complicit with the enemy. Isn’t this the squelching
of political debate that anarchists so vehemently oppose? To be clear,
we support the September 9th protests, both those organized by members
of the United Front for Peace in Prisons, and those promoted by the
IWOC. Our criticism is directed toward statements that participating in
these protests will shut down the prisons because prisons are dependent
on prisoner slave labor. If we did not make this clear in our articles
about September 9, we will take this criticism to help us approach the
struggle with a clearer focus on unity.
Finally, Zero wrote that we should have known about this work strike
sooner. It looks like there was some censorship of our mail from em so
letters from Zero about this didn’t get to us. We did reach out to IWOC
and others about working together on September 9 organizing once we
learned about the work strike (which we did hear about from a number of
ULK subscribers). We never got a response from the organizers. We
hope that going forward we can collaborate in the fight against the
criminal injustice system to build a stronger movement. This doesn’t
mean we will give up our communist position, nor does it mean that Zero,
ABC, or IWW need to give up their anarchism, and in fact we would argue
that continuing this debate publicly is good for everyone. In practice
we hope to collaborate on the September 9 protest in 2017.
In analyzing the system of social control in the United $tates, it is
imperative that we follow the correct line. The position of many today
is to argue that the injustice system is based on a “Prison-Industrial
Complex” [which we at MIM(Prisons) reject]. A new report,
“Following the
Money of Mass Incarceration” by Peter Wagner and Bernadette Rabuy,
provides additional evidence to back up our position.
Prisons are generally a complex web of concentration camps for oppressed
semi-colonies, rather than an economically profitable industry. Indeed,
there are some profits to be made (and capitalists/imperialists are good
at finding their niches), but overall, the purpose of the injustice
system today is population control.
As Wagner and Rabuy point out in their article: “In this
first-of-its-kind report, we find that the system of mass incarceration
costs the government and families of justice-involved people at least
$182 billion every year.”(1) This $182 billion includes the $374 million
in profits received by the private prison industry. The profits to these
numerically few stakeholders hardly represent a systematic
profit-generating enterprise. In fact, in the graph summing up their
research, the authors had to make an exception to the cut off for
significant portions of the U.$. prison budget in order to even include
private prisons on it!
“This industry is dominated by two large publicly traded companies –
CoreCivic (which until recently was called Corrections Corporation of
America (CCA)) and The GEO Group — as well as one small private company,
Management & Training Corp (MTC). We relied on the public annual
reports of the two large companies, and estimated MTC’s figures using
records from a decade-old public record request.”(1)
Private prison corporations have very little to gain in the prison
business, which is why the vast majority (up to 95%) are still public
prisons.(2) The Amerikkkan government (i.e. taxpayers) fronts the bill
for the $182 billion. The few economic beneficiaries of the prison
industry are commissary vendors, bail bond companies, and specialized
telephone companies. As Wagner and Rabuy demonstrate, these are the
multi-billion dollar industries. And they, of course, benefit, whether
the prisons are private or not!
Why would the imperialist system be willing to spend almost $200 billion
a year at the loss of widespread economic labor and consumers? For, as
is shown: “Many people confined in jails don’t work, and four state
prison systems don’t pay at all.”(1)
As Wagner points out in an article from 7 October 2015:
“Now, of course, the influence of private prisons will vary from state
to state and they have in fact lobbied to keep mass incarceration going;
but far more influential are political benefits that elected officials
of both political parties harvested over the decades by being tough on
crime as well as the billions of dollars earned by government-run
prisons’ employees and private contractors and vendors.
“The beneficiaries of public prison largess love it when private prisons
get all of the attention. The more the public stays focused on the
owners of private prisons, the less the public is questioning what would
happen if the government nationalized the private prisons and ran every
facility itself: Either way, we’d still have the largest prison system
in the world.”(3)
The capitalists don’t economically gain from the supposed
“Prison-Industrial Complex”, but the politicians gain from the white
Amerikkkan obsession with “crime”. Taking this into account, we find the
truth hiding behind Wagner and Rabuy’s cryptic phrase: “To be sure,
there are ideological as well as economic reasons for mass incarceration
and over-criminalization.”(1)
We’ve already looked at the economic reasons – power groups like the
bail bond companies and commissary vendors are obviously looking to make
a profit. So what are the ideological reasons?
When we look at prison populations (whether private or public), we can
see where mass incarceration gets its impetus. The vast majority of
prisoners are New Afrikans, Chican@s, and peoples of the First Nations
(even though euro-Amerikkkans are the majority of the U.$. population).
The prison is not a revenue racket, but an instrument of social control.
The motivating factor is domination, not exploitation.
If we’re following the money though, then we need look at how spending
breaks down. Wagner and Rabuy present the division of costs as: the
judicial and legal costs, policing expenditures, civil asset forfeiture,
bail fees, commissary expenditures, telephone call charges, “public
correction agencies” (like public employees and health care),
construction costs, interest payments, and food and utility costs.
The authors outline their methodology for arriving at their statistics
and admit that “[t]here are many items for which there are no national
statistics available and no straightforward way to develop a national
figure from the limited state and local data.”(1) Despite these obvious
weaknesses in obtaining concrete reliable data, the overwhelming
analysis stands.
Wagner and Rabuy discuss the private prison industry at the end of the
article. Here, they write:
“To illustrate both the scale of the private prison industry and the
critical fact that this industry works under contract for government
agencies — rather than arresting, prosecuting, convicting and
incarcerating people on its own — we displayed these companies as a
subset of the public corrections system.”(1)
As was argued in
“MIM(Prisons)
on U.S. Prison Economy”, “[i]f prison labor was a gold mine for
private profiteers, then we would see corporations of all sorts leading
the drive for more prisons.”(2)
In light of this, the injustice system in the United $tates and the
prisons (both private and public) are used by the government to oppress
national minorities. And the government is rewarded with enthusiasm and
renewed vigor by white Amerikkkans, who goose-step into formation with
ecstasy when racist politicians like Donald Trump go on about being
“tough on crime”.
MIM Thought stresses the focus on imperialism both inside and outside
the United $nakes. The network of prisons is no exception – imperialism
here functions as a method of control by Amerikkkans of oppressed
nations. As the statistics presented by Wagner and Rabuy clearly
demonstrate, there is no “Prison Industrial Complex.” There is a
systematic attempt to destroy individuals, communities, and nations.(4)
“Is there ever a time when we should unite with reactionary oppressor
nation lumpen orgs in a United Front for Peace in Prisons?” Absolutely!
You want to win, don’t you? For anyone to refuse to work with a
potentially valuable ally against this Juggernaut Force that both groups
are up against, due to a few minor differences in excess views and
opinions just sounds like folly. Wars are won by alliances, not the
practice of alienation.
History is full of these kinds of examples. The German Nazis were
undisputed white nationalist, white supremacy, white racist and
everything else white group that there has ever been. The Japanese were
anything but Aryan or white, yet despite that obvious fact, the two
groups were able to put those differences aside long enough in order to
wage war against the rest of the world.
“The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” Now that’s sound logic! If you
decide not to join forces with what you refer to as “white nationals,”
either because they are “white” or maybe even a little too proud of it,
then wouldn’t that sort of put you in the same boat as them, guilty of
the same things? Are you perhaps then a little bit racist too?
Are there so many of you that you can afford to be so picky about the
skin color, or differences in ideologies of those that we allow to align
themselves with you in this fight? Black communist and white nationalist
alike, neither can afford to turn away the aid of the other at a time
like this – especially in prison.
White nationalists are seasoned and often times expert resistance
fighters that come complete with a deep-seated hatred of our most potent
enemy, that any group in this fight would be lucky to have on their
side, once the real fighting starts. The Federal Government fears them
and has always feared them for those very reasons. These members of the
White Resistance Movement would bring their own unique skill sets to the
struggle, that you might otherwise be lacking in, such as military
strategy, connections – in parts of the underground that you’ve never
had access to before – military tactics and weapons knowledge, etc.
Now I’m only suggesting cooperation with certain white nationalists
and/or separatist individuals here and there, that might want to help,
not necessarily white nationalist “groups” per say. This is because
these types of groups attract a lot of attention from all the current
law enforcement agencies and especially the Federal Government and
because of that, each group is already heavily infiltrated by under
cover agents. So by uniting with such groups and organizations, you
would just be inviting those same numerous agents into the folds of your
own group.
There are lots of single disenfranchised ex-members of these groups
though, who are solid soldiers and have a lot to offer their next group
and I think that it would be a mistake to let them get away, if they are
willing to help.
MIM(Prisons) responds: This writer raises some good points about
uniting with all who oppose the same enemy, but perhaps goes too far
with the pragmatism of allying for the sake of size and skills. We
believe there needs to be some clear political unity in order to build a
united front. We don’t all have to agree that we want a communist system
in the end, but we must have at least one concrete goal that we can
unite around in practice. And we also need to agree that political
independence is acceptable, as we will not give up our principles just
for the sake of convincing someone who disagrees with us to work with us
anyway.
Under a bourgeois democracy, militant white nationalists are both tools
of and enemies of the state. As imperialism moves closer to fascism the
government’s fear lessens as they begin to utilize these groups more
directly. We’re not sure if we can say this is happening unter Trump yet
though, although ey as already been giving these groups many passes.
Lastly, we want to comment on the idea that it is racist to refuse to
unite with white nationalists. It would be incorrect to turn away white
allies just for the color of their skin, but it is not incorrect to
identify groups of people’s political and economic interests and to
identify potential allies based on this. If someone is promoting white
nationalism, that is
fundamentally
opposed to the liberation of oppressed nations: white nationalism
is, by definition, a belief in the superiority of the white nation which
already has the power and wealth. This sort of nationalism is
reactionary and opposing it is not the same thing as being racist. We
can unite with these people on specific tasks, while also struggling
with them over their line on white nationalism.
Regarding the question of united front alliances with white nationalist
groups, there are pros and cons to working with other groups. I have
been writing to MIM(Prisons) for a few years now and enjoy reading
ULK. I am pretty much my own one-man army. I do not ask others to
do things I will not do myself.
I am in a Federal Penitentiary in Tuscon, Arizona. This is a sex
offender, gang drop out, Protective Custody yard. I am not here by
choice. I am a registered sex offender for indecent exposure in a bar.
Even though charges were dropped I was forced to register and now I am
still fighting that case in the state. I am in Federal prison for
charges that were unrelated to the state charge. This yard does not have
politics that other yards have. We still have politics, but not to the
extreme. The chow hall is racially segregated but a man can sit wherever
he wants. The point I’m trying to get at is I could leave this yard and
go back to an active yard most likely and get killed for being a
registered sex offender even though the charges were dropped. That’s
politics. Now there is a lot of sex offenders and homosexuals, rats, and
dropouts. Everyone is here for a reason. I have been on active yards and
a lot of times, in fact most of the time, a person is putting his life
on the line for someone who is just a piece of shit or a dope fiend. I
no longer use dope and do not use dope in prison.
I grew up in the west from Montana to Arizona in the heart of the Aryan
nation, an enforcer for the Aryan Brotherhood with the old saying if it
ain’t white it ain’t right. I was a blind kid but a good soldier. At 41
years old I am now my own man. I have never left my brothers but I no
longer fight that fight of hatred. There are pros and cons to working
with other groups.
I have a question: are there no Maoists who are sex offenders or
snitches? Do the Maoists choose to work with other groups or try to
convert other groups to Maoism? It is one thing to work with a different
group to achieve the same goal. I am an individual in a group and my
goals as an individual are not always the same goals as the group. My
goal is freedom from an oppressive corrupt government and it does not
matter whether it is the USA or Russia, oppression is oppression,
corruptness is corruptness and this should be stopped. We all belong to
different groups, even the groups that feel the need to oppress others.
The enemy of my enemy is my ally. United Front for Peace!
This is no longer about politics or what group a person belongs to. I am
an independent Aryan Brother and I support the Maoist Internationalist
Ministry of Prisons and the struggle of incarcerated people. (I do not
like to use the word inmate or convict or any other word for prisoner
that is used to take a person’s personal power. These words make people
feel powerless, hopeless, and this is not true.) We are people, humans.
We have families, friends, just like everyone else.
MIM(Prisons) responds: This is an interesting letter about united
fronts because it comes from someone representing two of the groups that
we are often told to never ally with, and ey raises questions from the
other side. First on the question of sex offenders, this writer
demonstrates why trusting the state’s label of “sex offender” is as bad
as trusting the state’s label of “criminal.” We must decide for
ourselves which individuals are allies and which are enemies.
On the question of white nationalists and allies, this writer still runs
with eir group but apparently has significant disagreements with them if
ey also supports ULK and MIM(Prisons). This is an excellent
example of uniting all who can be united against the criminal injustice
system. We know that the Aryan Brotherhood is fundamentally opposed to
the liberation of oppressed nations. Just as the Communist Party of
China knew that the Kuomindang was fundamentally opposed to communism.
But in China before the revolution was successful, there was an
opportunity to build an alliance against Japanese imperialism, the
principal contradiction at the time. And we have a similar opportunity
to build an alliance against the criminal injustice system within
prisons. While certainly a smaller scale than the united front in China,
our common enemy in prisons offers the opportunity for alliances with
groups that will, in other battles, be our enemy. And it’s also possible
we will win over some folks from these groups who, like this writer,
believe that “oppression is oppression…and this should be stopped.”
This comrade mentions Russia, perhaps as a random example. But talking
about Russia and oppression is becoming a hot-button topic in the United
$tates today. This anti-Russia fervor is, as always, tied up with
Amerikan nationalism. It is being used to attack the current Trump
regime in a way that threatens the world with inter-imperialist and even
nuclear war. Russia was once part of the Soviet Union, which under Lenin
and Stalin was socialist. But after Stalin died in 1952 the country
moved quickly to take up state capitalism. And capitalism is a system
that thrives on oppression and corruption. But the anti-Russia revival
in the United $tates should not be mistaken for anti-imperialism, rather
it is nationalist rallying for the biggest most dangerous imperialist
power in the world – the United $nakes.
I would like to address the question if there should be a united front
alliance with white nationalist groups.
I am all for aligning with other groups who face oppression and who
share the same goals. When it comes to white nationalist groups first a
few things must be clarified. First question is who and what is “white.”
White is scientifically not a racial group. Also do whites in prison and
the world face the same systematic oppression as people of color? Lastly
looking at history how has interactions between whites and people of
color effected the non-white groups in a positive way?
The question on “who and what is white?” has an elusive answer
especially right here in the United $tates. Since 1790, the United
$tates has allowed only “free white persons” to become citizens; in the
twentieth century as non-European immigrants applied for citizenship it
became the responsibility of the courts to set limits upon whiteness.
George Dow, a Syrian immigrant, was denied eligibility for citizenship
on the basis that geography defined race; to be white was to be
European. Dow eventually won on appeal, showing that Syrians were indeed
Europeans based on geography and thus members of the white race. In
1922, a Japanese immigrant named Takao Ozawa argued that he should be
considered a white person because his skin was literally white,
asserting that many Japanese people were “whiter than the average
Italian, Spaniard, or Portuguese.” His case would go all the way to the
Supreme Court, which rejected his claim to citizenship and the idea that
race could be determined by skin tone: “To adopt the color test alone
would result in a confused overlapping of races and a gradual merging of
one into the other, without any practical line of separation,” claimed
one judge.
Using the science of the day, the court ruled that “the words ‘white
person’ are synonymous with the words ‘a person of the Caucasian race’.”
Since Ozawa was not a Caucasion, he could not be white. In only a short
time later, in the case of an Indian immigrant named Bhagat Singh Thind,
the Supreme Court betrayed its Ozawa ruling and declared that while all
whites are Caucasian, not all Caucasians were white. Even scientists
classified Thind as undeniably Caucasian, but the court insisted that
“White” must mean something more. “It may be true that the blond
Scandinavian and the brown Hindu have a common ancestor in the dim
reaches of antiquity, but the average man knows perfectly well that
there are unmistakable and profound differences between them today.” To
prove his purity, Thind invoked the Aryanist myth of ancient white
conquerors setting up the caste system to preserve their race. “The
high-class Hindu” he argued, “regards the aboriginal Indian mongoloid in
the same manner as the American regards the negro.” With all that Thind
was denied citizenship. Within the category of “Caucasian,” the court
noted one could find a wide range of peoples including South Asians,
Polynesians, and even the Hamites of Africa based upon their Caucasian
cast of features, though in color they range from brown to black. For
reasons not articulated the court decided Thind was not white, and
therefore not granted privileges of the white empire.
That the Supreme Court could reject a white-skinned Japanese because he
was not Caucasian and a brown-skinned Caucasian because he was not white
reveals that white people have made race what it has always been: an
unscientific and inconsistent means of enforcing social inequality that
further rules the machines of global white supremacy. This machine is
what gives birth to capitalism and imperialism and other oppressive
factions. So basically whiteness is whatever white people say it is. So
by white nationalist groups even identifying themselves as white places
them in a privileged position in the global white supremacy machine. It
is no secret why someone would want to identify as “white,” especially
in the United $tates where there is undeniably a caste system based on
skin color. With whiteness comes privilege and a sense of entitlement.
Yes, I know there are white comrades who are being oppressed also but it
is not solely based on their skin color or ethnic group. They are
basically collateral damage of the capitalistic and imperialistic system
that comes from global white supremacy. White people make up around 11%
of the world’s population yet at least 82% of the world’s population is
in some fashion being oppressed by the global white supremacy machine.
Are white nationalist groups really ready to give up their whiteness to
stand for true revolution even if that means in the process whiteness
will no longer exist?
History shows that those of us who fight for revolution have aligned
ourselves with white groups and white individuals who claim they seek
change too. In the midst of this, problems usually occurred. Most
notably is with William Lloyd Garrison. Garrison, a white man, can be
labeled as a true revolutionist of his time. As an abolitionist he spoke
out against slavery and demanded full racial equality even before the
Civil War. He also publicly burned the U.$. constitution, calling it an
“agreement with hell.” Garrison seemed like the white nationalist who
wanted to join the fight but he still couldn’t escape his sense of
privilege and superiority. This moment came when Frederick Douglass,
Garrison’s protégé, told Garrison that he wanted to start a newspaper.
Garrison, fearful that Douglass would draw black readers away from his
own paper and hurt that Douglass would even think of competing against
him, discouraged the plan. Another white abolitionist in Garrison’s
camp, Maria Weston Chapman, even doubted Douglass could have the mental
capacity for such a task. Douglass went ahead and started his newspaper
which ended his friendship with Garrison. Garrison, though he wanted to
help, could not see that the revolution was not about him but about the
millions of people being oppressed. He still had to be a white guy about
the whole situation. He took his sense of privilege and entitlement and
wanted to discourage another in his attempt to add to the cause. So can
white nationalist groups align themselves with the United Front without
trying to make the fight solely about their ego? Can the United Front
hold the fight when aligned with white nationalist groups without having
fear of offending white people when truths are spoken against
capitalism, imperialism and global white supremacy when it puts the
collective of white people in a negative light?
Lastly how have groups who are predominately non-white benefited in the
past when coming into contact with whites? Historically the relationship
between non-whites and whites has been one of colonization, genocide,
slavery, imperialism, and destruction. Though all non-white groups and
cultures did not live in idyllic golden ages before the coming of white
people, these elements weren’t consistent, nor were they typical, until
the advent of white culture domination. This has been the consistent
relationship of white people with the world. So history shows the
consistent nature of white people when coming in contact of non-white
people has been one of predatory and exploitative relationships.
Now some will say I’m being racist by stating these facts but consider
the fact that people of “hue” hence humans have been the most tolerant
and accepting people you’ll ever encounter (sometimes to our detriment)
and this premise of exclusion came from white people themselves. It is
only us who are confused about where they stand. Now yes there are those
white individuals and groups who attempt to confront and resist these
norms. Those who have attempted to do so in earnest have learned these
lessons the hard way. White people who actively resist whiteness (and
all of its norms) are out-casted, disowned, and reviled by other members
of their own groups. This is what defines the community and collective
identity and not the individuals who know that “treason to whiteness is
loyalty to humanity.”
So can white nationalist groups abandon their whiteness and sense of
privilege? If so then yes United Front can align with them in some
fashion. Based on historic events it should be controlled and constantly
evaluated. Also whites need not to hold hands with us and smile but
reach in their own communities and take the fight to their own who
actively and by default participate in the global white supremacy
machine which governs capitalism and imperialism.
MIM(Prisons) responds: We agree with this comrade that to
identify with whiteness is to identify with an oppressor nation, and we
therefore say that Amerikans must commit nation (as well as class and
gender) suicide through their actions, in order to join the side of
humynity.
The example given of Garrison and Douglass is a fine anecdote, but it is
just an example of a couple of people. So we would caution our readers
to not draw broad conclusions from isolated examples. And there are
books out there, like Settlers: The Mythology of a White
Proletariat by J. Sakai and False Nationalism, False
Internationalism by Sera and Tani that do broader historical
analysis of the relationships between the oppressed nations in the
United $tates and various groups of “revolutionary” or “progressive”
whites.
Both of those books are looking at imperialism, or at least its
emergence in the United $tates. Imperialism’s identity is found in the
conflict between the oppressor nations and the oppressed nations that
resist them. While ideas of superiority based on phenotypical
characteristics (appearance) certainly did not originate with
imperialism, it is with imperialism that nation becomes principal.
Therefore, we would reverse the author’s premise that the “[machine of
global white supremacy] is what gives birth to capitalism and
imperialism and other oppressive factions.” Marx and Lenin explained the
evolution of imperialism on economic terms, while the culture and ideas
that came with it were a reflection of those economic changes. In other
words, which came first, racism or capitalism? There were seeds of
racism before imperialism, but national oppression (the material
manifestation of racism) solidified as a system under the economic
conditions of imperialism. The ideas of racism, so central to our
society, are a product of this system of national oppression that
evolved with imperialism, not the cause of it.
In the struggle against white supremacy, capitalism, and imperialism, a
united front does not require agreement on every position, or even for
all parties to “stand for true revolution.” In the context of the prison
movement, white nationalists might be serious about the struggle against
long-term isolation because their leaders are very likely to face this
torture. In this case, we’d suggest we should unite with these groups to
work on that campaign. In this issue of ULK we have some examples
in which such temporary alliances for common interests as prisoners have
succeeded.
The question of how oppressor nation and oppressed nation
revolutionaries should relate in this country is a whole other question
brought up by this comrade. We will only address it briefly to bring up
some general points for further analysis. The urge to unite with white
people in the United $tates is a recurring theme due to the fact that
the white nation has been a majority population by design since the
founding of this country, and it’s hard to fight battles as the
minority. As we know, those numbers are projected to change in the
not-so-distant future. But even when euro-Amerikans become the minority,
will most oppressed nation people be anti-imperialist? In current
conditions they are not, though great potential remains. As we are
currently in a non-revolutionary situation, we think it is a reasonable
organizing strategy to avoid white people and white organizations
altogether. There are plenty of oppressed nation people yet to be
organized, and single-nation organizations have proven most effective in
U.$. history at building revolutionary movements.
As conditions become more revolutionary, if forces in favor of
revolution remain the minority in all nations in the United $tates,
those who avoided whites before may be tempted to address this issue
again. The Panthers organized with euro-Amerikans from a position of
strength, so that they largely avoided those euro-Amerikans harming
their movement, especially in the early years. Yet, Huey Newton found
New Afrikans in a position of weakness due to their minority status that
led to his proposal of the theory of intercommunalism. Fred Hampton’s
Rainbow Coalition and Huey Newton’s Intercommunalism demonstrate a
strong tendency in the Panther leadership to approach euro-Amerikans as
potential allies in the anti-imperialist united front similar to how
they approached other nations.
From Malcolm X to Stokely Carmichael to the Panthers, New Afrikan
revolutionaries have pushed whites to organize their own. But how do
they do that? Some white organizations tried to mimic the Panthers, but
this was only viable in small pockets of lumpenized whites. Other groups
have provided support structures to oppressed nations, where the focus
is on organizing whites to serve other nations. But we need something in
between, where white people can be leaders, applying and learning from
the scientific method of building a revolutionary movement, but at the
same time serving other nations in ways that are against the interest of
their own. We don’t think whites can organize on the same basis as the
Panthers, because they are on the opposite side of the principal
contradiction. But we also don’t think relegating whites to the kitchen
is allowing them to develop politically, and is therefore setting back
progress. This could be done on the basis of accountability and
self-criticism. It could also incorporate shared self-interest in
opposing environmental destruction and war. But a truly revolutionary
current among euro-Amerikans will likely not gain much traction until
the oppressed nations have progressed the struggle to a stage that is
more advanced than it is today.
The work of MIM(Prisons) through Under Lock & Key is
invaluable to those of us searching for tools, methods and means for
motivating the stagnant prison masses or even segments of the prison
population. Because the work is informative and an avenue of outside
support it is inspirational. Many of these individuals share very little
mutual interests that motivate their actions except for their greed.
Thus, to be able to spread a common literature throughout the cells and
blocks is a basic unifying instructive instrument. The same way as
prisoners are brought together to socialize by pop-culture media, I’ve
seen that Under Lock & Key has the same potential.
Talking to egotistical and materialistic people is less effective than
giving them material to absorb themselves without being defensive and
having the need to assert themselves. But what adds to the effectiveness
of the material is if it is wide spread it becomes more of a persuasive
cultural influence. Because in a disorganized and dysfunctional state
like Indiana basic buddy-cliques are dominant, the most effective way to
stir the population as a whole is to infuse these buddy-cliques with the
seeds they can use to grow. The material can be used to inject
enthusiasm, but that enthusiastic fervor will subside and when it does
individuals’ adolescent tendencies will re-emerge because the ideas were
never owned by the individuals. However, by quietly distributing the
material and leaving individuals to ponder the ideas alone, they’ll
begin to own the ideas and the adolescent displays of rebelliousness for
public demonstration are never given the chance to receive the reward of
public attention; things will be based on substance.
Here I simply note the power of media and the need to use it to create
and influence cultural ideas within cell blocks and prisons. There is a
single source where the vast numbers of prisoners receive their ideas
about society and what punishment should be. That source is drawn from
the well of those who punish them. If we can use Under Lock &
Key and MIM(Prisons) and United Struggle From Within efforts to
become a source of pop-culture throughout cell blocks and create a new
culture in prison that replaces the disorganization and dysfunction
we’ll be on the way to influencing the larger society.
I am writing to update you on comrades’ struggles against the Nevada
Department of Corrections (NDOC) grievance process. I have been fighting
against the inmate grievance process as employed by the NDOC for over a
year now. Last week, the caseworker came to my door and informed me that
all of my grievances had been rejected as improper grievances due to a
new Administrative Regulation (AR740) regarding grievances, which among
other things states that:
Inmates cannot state more than one claim per grievance,
Inmates may file no more than a single grievance in any 7 day period,
Those who violate these rules will face disciplinary action.
On this date, the case worker had over 300 grievances which were denied
as improper. The NDOC has implemented this revised AR740 to circumvent
inmate grievances so that they do not have to address our concerns.
I, and others, will of course, continue our struggle against the NDOC
grievance process. If you or anyone else has any ideas on a path we
should take to get this issue to court, I would appreciate it.
MIM(Prisons) responds: We do have a Nevada grievance petition for
use by prisoners to fight the violation of First Amendment rights based
on the AR740 rules. We will need someone from Nevada to volunteer to
re-write this petition to cite the updated rules. But the bigger problem
is that these rules were changed to essentially limit the ability of
prisoners to file grievances, which of course is required if we’re going
to demand these grievances be addressed. This sounds like a case that
needs to be taken to court, and perhaps would interest one of the legal
advocacy organizations in Nevada. Short of that we are stuck fighting
within their (arbitrary) rules.
This regulation change underscores our message that we’re not going to
beat the criminal injustice system at their own game. We can sometimes
use their own rules and laws to gain small victories, but in the end the
courts and prisons are set up to perpetuate the injustice system. We can
only win by organizing independent institutions and dismantling this
system.
Write to us for a copy of the old Nevada grievance petition if you
can help update it based on these new regulations.
I would like to update you on my lawsuit I was preparing against
Colorado Department of Corrections (CDOC) due to one egotistical officer
in recreation: Lieutenant Ross.
I think MIM(Prisons)
printed
my story, but due to Denver Women’s Correctional Facility (DWCF) not
allowing us ULK anymore I can’t be sure, but I did get feedback
from several readers.(1) And now DWCF allows us to go outside and walk
during any weather like the men do.
So thank you for printing my fight and thank your readers for writing
and supporting me. I have not had to put forward the lawsuit, but I am
thankful for the MIM(Prisons) grievance petition. I sent it to the
Executive Director. So thank you for the form, it really helps putting
the fight against CDOC in better written terms than I would have been
able to do on my own.
MIM(Prisons) responds: This comrade provides an excellent example
to others. From eir work fighting injustice and consistency in providing
updates about the progress in this battle, to staying in touch in spite
of the censorship of ULK going on at DWCF. While a victory to get
all-season and all-gender access to rec is just a small battle in the
overall fight against imperialism, it will allow activists in DWCF more
opportunity to talk and study with others and to stay healthy. We hope
everyone there will take advantage of this opportunity to build for the
next battle, which may need to be a fight against censorship so we can
get revolutionary materials in to our comrades at this institution.
Calculating the transfer of wealth from exploited nations to imperialist
countries is a difficult task. Even those with the knowledge and time to
do the research find that bourgeois economics does not look at things in
terms that Marxists do. There are a number of excellent books by
Marxists on this topic on our literature list.(1) Adding to this
research is a recent report from Global Financial Integrity (GFI), which
they call “the most comprehensive analysis of global financial flows
impacting developing countries compiled to date.”(2)
The main conclusions of this report are:
“since 1980 developing countries lost US$16.3 trillion dollars through
broad leakages in the balance of payments, trade misinvoicing, and
recorded financial transfers… the report demonstrates that developing
countries have effectively served as net-creditors to the rest of the
world with tax havens playing a major role in the flight of unrecorded
capital. For example, in 2011 tax haven holdings of total developing
country wealth were valued at US$4.4 trillion, which exacerbated
inequality and undermined good governance and economic growth.”(2)
According to the report, China is responsible for about a quarter of the
Third World’s net resource transfers to the First World. Despite a
growing finance capitalist class, China is still the largest proletarian
nation providing wealth for Amerikans and other First World nations. A
long fall from grace from when it was the most advanced socialist
economy in history, reinvesting all of its wealth into building its own
self-sufficiency and serving the needs of its own people.
Last year, the so-called “Panama Papers” brought more light to the issue
of tax havens, and the role they play in allowing finance capitalists to
move money in ways that avoid having to pay taxes to the states they
operate in and often avoiding other legal restraints on how they do
business. GFI points to tax havens, as well as illegal movement of
capital goods, as playing large roles in facilitating this transfer of
wealth from the exploited countries to the imperialist core countries.
Possible solutions to this problem provided in the cited articles are
debt forgiveness, shutting down tax havens, and enforcement of fines by
agencies such as the World Trade Organization (WTO).(3) Having powerful
people monitor and fine other powerful people is like the fox guarding
the hen house, and will never make fundamental changes in a system whose
whole purpose is the drive for profit.
MIM(Prisons) supports the call for debt forgiveness for poor countries.
As the report states, “for every $1 of aid that developing countries
receive, they lose $24 in net outflows.”(2) A campaign to resist these
predatory aid programs combined with forgiveness of existing loans would
loosen the current death grip of imperialism on the exploited nations of
the world. And if we consider the numbers below, 1:24 is a gross
underestimation of the scale of exploitation going on.
Another powerful move to provide some relief to the poor under
capitalism would be to enforce a global minimum wage through a body such
as the WTO. Economist Arghiri Emmanuel showed the relationship between
wage levels and the transfer of wealth between nations in the form of
unequal exchange. While this recent work by GFI is more
in-depth than most by looking at illegal practices such as reporting
false prices to avoid taxes and restrictions, it ignores the hidden
transfer of wealth that is enabled by the low wages that are violently
enforced on the proletariat of the exploited nations. This transfer of
wealth is not included in the $16.3 trillion transfer of wealth
calculated by GFI. MC5 of MIM estimated wealth transfer to the
imperialist countries at $6.8 trillion in just one year (1993), as did
Zak Cope, who looked at 2009 with a similar lens but different approach
to MC5.(4)
While GFI states that, “Every year, roughly $1 trillion flows illegally
out of developing and emerging economies due to crime, corruption, and
tax evasion”, their vision of a capitalism with more integrity would
only eliminate an estimated 15% of the value exploited from the majority
of the world for the benefit of the imperialist nations. We ally with
such bourgeois internationalists on some of the demands mentioned above,
but also take it further than they will to eliminate imperialism in all
its forms and create a world without any form of exploitation or
oppression, whether illegal or not.
You encourage all groups in prison to set aside their differences and
come together (collective action). As always in my letters to you, I
believe the socialist effort will not be successful unless it makes
contact with most or all of the radical/reform groups and encourages
collective actions between them.
Think about it. If you could start a dialogue with other groups then you
would gain the chance to educate them about how mass imprisonment is a
standard feature of any capitalist government. Imprisonment is the
favored control method for the masses. As long as people are
propagandized to believe capitalism is good, you will have thousands of
laws to control the lumpen and minorities -– hence, prisons.
Per the September 2016 newsletter of the Coalition for Prisoners’ Rights
(P.O. Box 1911, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87504-1911), it was reported that
the Formerly Incarcerated and Convicted Peoples Movement (FICPM) had a
conference on September 9 in which over 500 people attended, of which
people from over 30 states were in attendance. The FICPM wants to
organize the 65 million people who have been screwed over by the U.$.
system as a political voting block. This group has the possibility of
actual success.
MIM(Prisons) responds: There are two separate points we want to
address in this letter. First the question of what will be necessary for
the socialist effort to be successful. This comrade believes that we can
succeed by bringing together the radical/reform groups (presumably
within the United $tates). Where this author says we would be able to
educate these groups on a deeper understanding of the relationship
between capitalism and prisons, we agree that doing this on an
individual basis is possible and has been proven with success on the
ground. Some people enter the reform groups because that’s all that
they’re aware of at the time. When they seek a more thorough way to
address the world’s problems, they may decide to switch to revolutionary
organizing instead. We aim to be available for these people, ready to
work with them when they’re ready to switch.
But as far as winning over whole groups, this hasn’t worked out
successfully when tried in the past. And we understand this phenomenon
in the context of our class analysis, because the vast majority of
people within imperialist countries are bought off and actually support
their imperialist government. They may protest a few policies, but they
are very much opposed to revolutionary change in the interests of the
world’s majority because that would have a negative impact on their
persynal financial situation in the short term.
Because of this, we see socialist revolution coming from the oppressed
nations, both internationally and within U.$. borders. For the most part
we anticipate it will need to be imposed on imperialist countries (like
the United $tates) from the outside, but there is an important role for
revolutionaries living within the belly of the beast. We must do all we
can to weaken the government and also support the revolutionary
struggles of oppressed nations globally. We can break off as many allies
for the struggle as possible. But we shouldn’t be unrealistic in our
expectations of what we can achieve behind enemy lines.
With that said, we do agree that building unity with progressive
organizations on the streets is a good goal. We set a baseline goal for
this unity around either a political action or a political line. For
instance, we work to build unity around battles against the criminal
injustice system with all who will support these battles, regardless of
their political positions on other issues. For the anti-imperialist
struggle we build unity with all who truly oppose imperialism.
But coming back to our first point, we do not think that groups that,
for instance, promote recycling, are actually opposing imperialism. They
are just helping to put a pretty pseudo-ecological face on capitalism
(also termed “green washing”). So when someone tells us to unite with
all “radical/reform groups” to achieve our goals of building socialism
and opposing imperialism, we have to call this out as a request that we
sacrifice revolutionary politics in the name of false unity. We don’t
actually have unity in the fight against imperialism with those reform
groups that are trying to make imperialism a bit kinder, but whose
strategy keeps the overall system in place. It’s important that we
define our political principles and understand who are truly fighting on
the side of the oppressed people of the world.
This will be my full account of my evolvement with the organizing of
peace between all prisoners, be they independent citizens of this yard
or members of lumpen groups or organizations. Many prisoners have been
involved in the processes that will be disclosed, to ensure their safety
their names won’t be mentioned in this report. All circumstances are
well known by the prisoner population on this yard (C yard @ Tehachapi)
and can therefore be verified easily by asking and requesting anyone who
receives ULK on this yard. Before starting I want to give shouts
out to
United
Front for Peace in Prisons (UFPP), because I hold your principles
and am inspired by your scientific methods. As a 5%er I give all due
respects to the teachings of the
Nation of Gods and
Earths (NGE) for my Free dome and clear sight which allows me to
live in a non-fictional reality, being awakened to the True Self which
is righteousness without fear. Also I would like to thank ULK and
MIM(Prisons) for
providing revolutionary education for free, which has taught me how to
lead and helped me realize that I am a socialist with a revolutionary
conscience. Thank all the prisoners here at California Correctional
Institution (CCI) who’s assisted me [nicknames omitted], Tha Numbers,
Tha Old Black Vanguard and a huge part of the New Afrikans and Chican@s.
I arrived here at CCI in mid-2016. Upon my arrival I introduced myself
as a member of the NGE. I met several New Afrikans that were very
negative about the program here, C.O. culture, prisoner treatment and a
myriad of other complexities dealing with conflicts among prisoners. The
first persyn I came to know from a non-fictional reality is a member of
one of the largest street organizations in North America. Our first
conversations would become the foundation and conduit for many actions
that followed. His assessment of the yard has proven to be invaluable,
though bleak when he spoke of the mental deadness of our people; meaning
the Black prison population on the yard. Blind, deaf and dumb with no
concept of organization or unity. This comrade is indispensable to the
prosperity, growth, and development of this yard’s prisoner on just
about every level. His advice is most valuable now as ever.
To begin to address these conditions, I initiated the weekly services
for everyone on the yard who wants to attend as a place of unity,
education and true identity resurrection. From proposal to acceptance it
took one month, then from acceptance to being physically scheduled it
took three more weeks ending when we had the first NGE service in
November 2016.
At the same time this was being developed, most people were saying this
will never be accepted by the administration on this yard. Doubters
included prisoners, as well as Captains, Chaplains and Correctional
Officers. I persynally began circulating my verbal disapproval of
two-on-one violence or group violence against one person. Simply stating
these actions won’t be tolerated when acted out against New Afrikans by
other racial groups nor by other New Afrikans on New Afrikan prisoners
nor member of other races who are also prisoners regardless of charges
and convictions issued by the unlawful court system. By my understanding
this position is backed by the BPP’s 10 point program demand #8.(1) This
has become the new norm through actions I will now describe.
On a day at the ass end of September 2016, at the morning yard for the
lower tier, I noticed a dichotomy between a group of Aztlán known as the
Number and an elder from the New Afrikans. Three members of the Number
appeared to be attempting to jump physically this unknown elderly New
Afrikan when his cellie physically assisted him ending the exchange of
blows by walking away and descending to the bottom of the yard. All this
happened in the direct view of the yard Correction Officers without any
response. After my initial investigation of the occurrence turned little
to no information I migrated to the bottom of the yard to build and
better understand what I had just witnessed. Upon speaking to a New
Afrikan soldier who we shall call Ty, me and him decided to get to the
bottom of this matter. The elder explained that the Number owed him and
upon confrontation about the debt verbally refused to pay. That is when
the elderly New Afrikan swung his fist, hitting the debtor in the jaw,
causing 3 members of the Number lumpen group to engage him in physical
battle. After the knowledge, me and Ty decided to go and confront the
Numbers, to issue a formal notice that the jumping of any New Afrikan
would no longer be accepted and if we cannot have an agreement we would
go to war at that moment. However, due to the magnetic energy all the
New Afrikans on the yard mobilized with unity and harmoniously walked as
one to the Numbers table at which time the aforementioned decree was
stated to the Numbers. They decided peace was best for the yard at that
moment and minutes later came assuring the elderly New Afrikan he would
receive what he was owed. They apologized for the acts of aggression and
the miscommunication.
During this time the Correctional Officers stayed in their yard position
but many prisoners reported hearing them radio the tower to shoot Blacks
if violence was to occur. Many New Afrikans felt the power of unity that
day and began a positive dialogue due to being empowered by the unity of
that event. That day also respectful communication between New Afrikans
and Numbers were established including beginning dialogue between white
nationals of two different lumpen groups in days to follow, which opened
up the door for me to begin to share the
principles
of the UFPP with both major groups. The NGE membership grew to 23
prisoners of a racially diverse demographic, mostly New Afrikan but
Aztláns and YT’s joined too. I shared white national books out of my
collection with the white nation lumpen group member and believed we had
strong lines of communication.
Over a month later, in November 2016, an issue was made known to me
about an alleged thief of a radio supposedly by a New Afrikan who had a
history of mischief named KC. When word got to me I was told the Aztláns
were planning to jump the New Afrikan, after sharing this with my
comrade it was decided that we would investigate in order to keep the
peace. While playing basketball someone had taken the radio off of the
sidelines where items had been sat inside owners’ shirts. My comrade
believed KC to be the culprit, which he denied. Voluntarily, all the New
Afrikans stripped down to their boxers proving they didn’t have the
property in question, lastly and with little fuss KC stripped proving he
didn’t have it. Then all the Aztláns likewise stripped proving they
didn’t have it either. The victim still felt like KC was guilty and
wanted to fight. KC reluctantly obliged and whipped him and peace was
better established stating New Afrikans won’t turn down no battle if
requested but peace is desired.
Almost a month later a white national, who I believed to be solid used
our growing relationship to lure KC away from myself, then attacked him
with a huge stone in a pillow case when his back was turned. Needless to
say his instant karma manifested, KC was able to thwart this plot
against himself and turn the tide with a huge victory over this extreme
form of physical oppression and violent aggression. In days to follow
white national politics seemed to attempt to establish itself, with
whites telling Blacks they could not use pull up bars near their table.
On hearing this I spoke with their known leaders and we all decided to
end all attempts at making C yard a racialized environment and instead
work together on a proposal to help create this yard into an honor yard.
Vowing to do away with weapon usage and to better establish open lines
of communication in order to solve interracial issues without violence.
There was an issue which touched home that I must share with you now.
One of the persyns I most respect was accused of a savage crime against
his celly. At the time I was allowing him to use my TV and a few CDs as
was two other comrades. Upon his arrest people began circulating rumors
of his alleged guilt. Due to his conduct and our developed closeness I
persynally went to those prophecizing against him and told them to stop
and desist. While he was being investigated a white porter came into
blame for what was by then deemed missing property, that the porter had
access to and had allegedly stolen. This was based on the fact that
neither my TV nor all the CDs and a CD player made it to R&R. He was
blamed and pressured to pay for two of the missing CDs by someone of
influence. During this time I found out that the Building Officer had on
his own taken my TV out of this persyn’s property before it even left
the building along with the CD player. I was asked to protect the white
porter by one of the members of the original Black prisoners vanguard
party, which I agreed to. Then the Correctional Officer returned my TV
after keepin it almost two weeks, which is not just unfair but it is
unlawful and burglary by definition. I didn’t know if the white porter
was guilty so I didn’t charge him for my CDs knowing that the comrade
was innocent and would be returning. Under threat and fear the white
porter paid a 16oz jar of coffee to the owner of two missing CDs.
Well, I was right about the porter being innocent and the comrade
because when he came back the CDs were in his property which he returned
to their owners. The porter got his coffee back and all the false
prophets learned a valuable lesson and some even apologized for smutting
the comrade.
Now I have a monthly unity walk at yard with an all inclusive New
Afrikan peaceful unity movement and I will have my first banquet in
February 2017, of which all the leaders of the different lumpen
organizations have been invited to attend. I will read UFFP principles
at that time and speak on United Prisoners (UP) its benefits and how
important it is to take the initiative in the Change Movement.
Today we Raza and Natives/others kicked off the new year by exercising
unity here in C Yard by not going to work or education at work center
(head quarters) of this yard. Other factions decided not to participate
because they care too much about the 5-10¢ paying job they currently
have (Lumpen Aristocracy?).
This campaign we currently put into motion is to stop the form of
harassment these pigs use thru daily body searches, i.e. x-ray body
scan, strip search, etc. before we go to school/work and before we
leave. We know that we can stop at least the x-ray scan from taking
place for we will continue to refuse the x-ray scan and therefore
work/education. This is the recent flow here.
Persynally I believe that we should shut down all movement but still go
to Yard, programs and accept our food. Just make the pigs do all the
work. That is the only way to make these pigs fly. Even then, these
forms of campaigns are at a beginner step and might not be fully
successful. We should still engage and get a feel of the opposition. The
only way we know how to deal with an opposition is thru the motion of
our resistance. It is then that we’ll know what we’re up against and to
what extent they’ll go. Not only this but we learn on how to combat the
beast. New views and forms of tactics come from this. It is what we call
the dialectical-materialist theory of the unity of knowing and doing.
I’m once again checking in from California Correctional Institution
(CCI). In 1966, Huey Newton and Bobby Seale planted the seeds of the
Black Liberation movement in Oakland. The seeds they planted rapidly
spread to the rest of the United States and now years later we’re
fighting for the same things as the Panthers.
We still follow the same theme of Black nationalism, armed militancy,
intercommunalism, and answering the call to join the revolutionary
struggle. Even today, I can still see and hear the voices of comrades
such as Huey P. Newton, Bobby Seale, Angela Davis, Gwen Fontaine,
Fredrika Newton and Lil Bobby Hutton; their teachings, thoughts,
practices. And they still resonate with significance and power through
the pages of books.
The spirit of the Panthers have been spread so deep into the roots of
Black life and into the fabric of every African Community in America,
that it’s just natural for us to want to stand up and fight when we hear
the call. In our homes, schools, hoods, jails, and prisons. That’s the
revolutionary legacy, and the spirit these comrades planted in us.
This yard we’re on is considered an Ad-Seg kick out yard. But in our
efforts to educate the people we’ve begun to create something better.
This yard is becoming a place where cadres are born. We have created
programmes that serve the people: we have political study groups, we
have a GED study group, in which we are helping comrades get their GEDs,
and we are helping individuals with their college classes as well.
I am very proud of the comrades on this facility of all nationalities.
Because we’re not just talking we’re doing, pushing hard for a truly
united front and serving the people. We have just submitted the
paperwork for a banquet. That will be used as a Unity Celebration, where
we will all meet and share our thoughts on the issues of today, and
share a little political knowledge with each other.
The only issue I see is that the room only holds fifty people, so not
all of the groups can fit in this room, so we’re planning to have
another on the yard the next day. We don’t want anyone left out. We are
here to serve the people, educate the people, and to help liberate the
people, all the people. My rules are if we focus on what we have in
common and less on our differences we’ll be able to learn better, who we
are, and what we’re about.
We all want the same things. We all have the same goals, and we all want
to create positive change in our world, and in our communities. A
community by way of definitions is a comprehensive collection of
institutions that serve the people who live there. CCI C-Facility is
where we are living right now. So this is the community we’re serving.
It is the duty of all revolutionaries to make the revolution. This is
obviously rule one. But this is a way of denouncing, in the context, all
the so-called revolutionaries who not only did not seek to make the
revolution, who managed secure income, talk the revolutionary shit, but
who torpedoed the efforts of the people to liberate themselves and that
must not be. As Huey said, revolutionary theory without practice ain’t
shit.
I was sitting on tier speaking with a brotha on an intellectual note on
topics in your ULK
52 issue. The thing is neither of us ever seen your publication (any
of them). After we were done another brotha handed me issue No. 52 on
his way to see the Sergeant over some writeups he got when they hit his
room. He told me “you’ll like this!”
Now before we explore my reaction to your publication you have to know
the ground on which I stand and the position I’m coming from. I’m a sex
offender. Believe it or not, not by choice, but in the state of Nevada I
knew that signing a deal would be the only way to see light again. Trial
would be death.
I read your issue from front to back. The whole time I was reading it I
wanted to write to you and tell you how I was waiting for something like
this to approach me. Then, I got to the last page and read the upcoming
themes. In No. 55 I read “Would unity with pariahs such as snitches or
child molesters ever be appropriate?” Reading that prompted me to switch
my motive to speak on this first hand. But before I can do that you need
to know a little about me.
I was raised very well with a loving family. My academics always were
“en punto.” National Honor Society – all that stuff. I spent 9 years in
the military. Leaving my family several times so spoiled brats could
remain safely at home with theirs. I have an Associates Degree, I’m
semi-fluent in Spanish, I’m halfway through obtaining a paralegal
certificate from Blackstone, I’m a writer, and I’m Black.
I will not defend child molesters or snitches but I want to shed some
light on sex offenders in general – since I am one. I have five kids so
I know the need to protect my babies. Then I found myself fighting for
my life on the very subject that I said I would kill someone over for
messing with my babies.
I had and have a different outlook now by my circumstances and by
removing my bias. After it was evident I was coming to prison I decided
to help other sex offenders (SOs) fight their cases. I obtained a
client, a pisa, who couldn’t speak English well. I fine-tooth-combed his
discovery. There was no evidence but much hearsay. Despite my help and a
paid lawyer he received a kidnapping and sexual assault charge with a
teen.
Sounds like a typical innocence story right? Well, I have more detail
that I can’t tell you but I believe he’s innocent. There are more people
in here with similar innocence claims all over the world but I wanted to
get to a point in response to your issue No. 55 question.
Prison has a caste system and SOs find their way to the bottom. We are
the lowest class in society and outside of society. I don’t like calling
myself a sex offender. In fact, I’m not, but I’m labeled as one because
my charge says that I am. My circumstances of my charge won’t allow me
to admit to being one. But it doesn’t matter what I think or say. I’ve
noticed, in my time around other SOs that they (most of them) made a
mistake or a bad choice. I’m not talking about rapists, but still, I’ve
met some very good people.
I’ve lived a very good life. I always been hard working, trustworthy,
reliable, smart and loving. I’ve learned a lot in the military
especially from visiting foreign countries. Cambodia and Iraq taught me
a lot. Before now I never been in trouble with the law. When I didn’t
have I still gave. And I still do. I run store in my unit but it’s not
for me. The profit takes care of who I choose, who I believe is the less
fortunate. If somehow I can make one person see that sex offenders are
human, I made a difference. I would like to be a force to help unite
all. The sex offender label shouldn’t disqualify people in a movement
bigger than us because if it does – would that really be socialism?
MIM(Prisons) responds: “Sex offenders” in general are seen as
pariahs who can’t be touched, and certainly can’t be part of a
progressive movement. But as this comrade points out, people are labeled
as sex offenders by our enemies, and we have no reason to take their
word for it. How many people behind bars are unjustly sentenced or even
innocent? Why do prisoners know this is true for people convicted of
other crimes, but condemn all convicted sex offenders on the word of the
criminal injustice system?
Our society encourages rape. Movies, music, advertising, porn, it’s all
pushing coercion and sex. Rape is coerced sex, and in a patriarchal
society it’s impossible to set up a relationship where both people are
totally equal. There are differences in income, social status, beauty,
educational achievement, etc. etc. All these things have become part of
what people find attractive and we are indoctrinated to believe these
inequalities are sexy.
We don’t let people off the hook for knowingly committing violence
against other people. But we also know that people are a product of
their culture and we need to push for the re-education of people if we
hope to build a society where all people truly are equal. Because of
this, we must also judge people based on what they do, and not a label
put on them by the criminal injustice system. We agree with this writer
that people make mistakes, and that they can change.
“America no puede existir sin separarnos a nosotros mismos de nuestras
identidades.”
La lucha comenzó en 2011, con una lucrativa propuesta de una compañía
Canadiense para acceder a tierras tribales y transportar petróleo crudo
al Golfo de Texas. Dicen que la construcción ayudará a crear trabajos
permanentes, que el dinero dado a los consejos tribales ayudará a
satisfacer las necesidades de las personas. En realidad, esta tubería
creará un desastre ambiental. América nunca puede financiar su propia
estructura, ¿cómo se puede esperar el mantenimiento de una tubería en
las tierras tribales soberanas?
El problema no es sólo la tubería y toda la inmundicia que viene con
ella. El problema es la total violación de nuestros tratados, y la falta
de tratamiento de la auto-determinación y la Declaración de las Naciones
Unidos sobre los Derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas. Esta tubería pisotea
a los derechos humanos y prueba la ciudadanía de segunda clase que se
les da a todas las naciones tribales, y personas.
Tomen en consideración como todos los portavoces del gobierno se
enfurecen con cualquier violación de cualquier tratado otorgado a
gobiernos extranjeros por el gobierno de Estados Unidos, ¿porqué son tan
rápidos al descartar los derechos que se otorgaron a las naciones
tribales?
Fuimos a la guerra por esos tratados. Si, es 2016 y todos los “indios”
deberían funcionar como Amerikanos regulares, al menos esa es la
retórico. Pero al iniciar un tratado se nos provee reconocimiento, y
estipula acuerdos bilaterales que todas las partes deben honrar. Al
menos, de hecho, que nuestros tratados sean sólo “pedazos de papel”, y
si ese es el caso, Rusia debería pasar por alto las resoluciones de la
ONU con los Estados Unidos y bombear Israel. No es igual? El Artículo 6
de la constitución de los Estados Unidos y la cláusula piloto de 1888
dice lo contrario. Ambos reconocen el poder permanente de todos los
tratados Indígenas y todas las Naciones Indígenas. Sólo porque los
tiempos han cambiado no significa que las palabras también.
El gobierno de los Estados Unidos ha estado empujando a todas las
naciones tribales al genocidio por los últimos 298 años. La pobreza,
agua mala, aire contaminado, desperdicio nuclear, minas abiertas de
uranio, alcoholismo, ninguna infraestructura de trabajo para empezar.
El suicidio entre hombres jóvenes se ha convertido en una epidemia.
Solamente somos endulzados con palabras cuando los trabajadores del
gobierno quieren sentirse bien, luego nos quitan a nuestros hijos, los
llevan al lado del estado y los tiran a la “gente blanca” para que los
civilicen — violando así otra ley federal, la Ley para el Bienestar del
Niño Indígena.
Esta tierra significa más para nosotros que sólo una terreno para todo
el pueblo tribal, igual que en 1848 cuando los Estados Unidos se unieron
a todo Aztlán desde México y construyeron la frontera paramilitar más
grande en el mundo, se esta haciendo mucho para separar a las naciones
tribales de nuestras tierras. En 1973 peleamos y morimos por nuestra
tierra. Si es necesario, marquen mis palabras, nos levantaremos y
pelearemos de nuevo. Esta tierra es nuestra identidad. Tiene la sangre
de nuestros ancestros, y la tubería matará a nuestra gente.
Is there ever a time when we would unite with reactionary
oppressor-nation lumpen organizations in a united front for peace in
prisons?
This particular question is one that contains within itself a set of
extremely complex issues concerning the ideology of these types of
groups or organizations. It is only after we examine these issues that
we can make an intelligent informed decision concerning this question of
uniting with a reactionary-oppressor organization in prison.
We know that at their very core a large percentage of these groups are
deeply rooted in their beliefs in Adolf Hitler and/or the Nordic Gods,
or they are rooted in the distorted beliefs of so called “white
Christianity”” (ie the KKK or the Church of Jesus Christ, Christian,
etc.). All of their gods are considered to be extremely Aryan and will
only deal with or help those who are white Aryan people unless it
benefits them. Those who hold to the ideals of “white Christianity” have
merely reconstructed the Holy Bible to fit their views of white
supremacy. These white Christian organizations support those
organizations who are neo-Nazi by nature.
The ideologies of both of these styles of organizations are centered
around the philosophy of one being “white.” Yet, you do find exceptions
to this way of thinking. However, you generally discover that their
mottos revolve around the principle of “if you ain’t white, you ain’t
right.” This ideology holds not only the connotation of the color of
your skin is important, but likewise so are your ethical, moral, and
religious beliefs. This, in itself implies that you are never going to
be on an equal status with them.
These white nationalists live by a 14 word creed “we must secure the
existence of our race and the future of white children.” They likewise
live by what they call the 88 precepts which create a vision of
superiority for the white race.
Both morally and ethically the vast majority of white nationalist
organizations find it extremely difficult to honestly and openly reach
out to others with a spirit and agenda of true peace. This is due to the
basic core of their beliefs that have been hammered into them since they
were young. They have been taught to use other races, groups,
organizations or individuals to gain their advantages for the betterment
of themselves and once they are finished with them they simply jettison
them and move on to their next victim.
Having presented the above to you the informed reader, I now remind you
that we as individuals and a movement must never forget that the best
method for change concerning these types of groups and organizations is
to openly and honestly invite them to participate in the process for
peace. If we diligently allow them to become actively involved in the
process then perhaps their hearts and minds will be opened to the truth.
We must never let ourselves succumb to the way of thinking that we are
better than others. We must steadfastly remain inclusive of everyone
around us. Always remember that if we can affect one mind, just one
heart, then indeed we have made a great step for all mankind.
Through slothfulness and unawareness we do surely die. Through strength,
honor, courage and vigilance we surely do survive!
MIM(Prisons) responds: This is an interesting commentary on
uniting with white nationalist organizations because it comes to the
same conclusion we have come to, but for different reasons. We agree
that the United Front for Peace in Prisons can include reactionary
organizations. It is true that sometimes through a united battle we can
educate others and change their minds to a more progressive viewpoint.
But we must be clear that we only unite with reactionary organizations
when we have common goals and enemies, and when this unity might serve
to push forward the battle with our principle enemy. Just as the Chinese
communists allied with the Kuomindang in the war against the Japanese
imperialists in spite of the Kuomindang previously attacking the
communists and expressing significant disagreement, antagonism and
aggression against the communists. At that time the principal task of
the movement was to get the Japanese occupiers out of China. And the
Kuomindang was an organization of Chinese nationals and so they shared
this goal with the communists. Once that was accomplished the communists
knew they would then need to fight the Kuomindang, but it did not make
sense to divide the anti-Japanese forces and take on both battles at
once.
Similarly we see our principal task being best advanced by building
peace and unity among prisoner organizations so that we can all focus
our fight on the criminal injustice system. This doesn’t mean we expect
white supremacist organizations to be won over to the side of the
oppressed. But we can have principled unity with these organizations as
we focus on a common enemy. We will not compromise our views or pretend
to agree with them politically. And in this principled unity we may win
over a few from the ranks of these white nationalist organizations who
begin to see the correctness of our political positions.
I have had a revolutionary mindstate since I was 16 (I am 30 now), when
I realized our current government structure was corrupt and I started
searching for a new philosophy. I came into Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.
Ever since then I have been a sort of pariah in society for my views. I
caught my first bid at 18 and have been in and out of the prison system
repeatedly. Mind you these prison bids were my own fault but the length
of the sentences were always to the extreme. I was never given a second
chance. Now I am in a Level 4 work release and finally about to go home
in a few weeks and felt it necessary to share my views.
For starters oppressor-nation lumpen organizations should not ever be
trusted. Joining with their factions they will try to incorporate their
bigoted views into our cause and give true freedom a sour taste in our
mouths. That is why we should avoid this situation. A united front is
exactly how it sounds, united at all fronts no matter your race, sex,
creed, or class. Hatred should not be tolerated within our ranks.
The same goes for pariahs such as snitches, child molesters, and
rapists. These are things we should not tolerate. In order for the
revolution to succeed we cannot have people looking at our organizations
as a threat to house and home. Unity is built on trust. Would you trust
a convicted and known child molester to be around your children, or a
convicted rapist to be around our wimmin? I know I wouldn’t. Amerikkka
would love for us to have dissension within our ranks and we cannot
afford to have this.
As for snitches, they work for the government! This cannot be allowed to
infiltrate our ranks. If you would tell on a case so you don’t go to
jail, how can we trust you with political treason? Our revolutionary
leaders are already being killed and incarcerated, we cannot let in
anyone who will jeopardize more of our leaders. Take for instance, one
of us was in contact with Edward Snowden (a true patriot, also this is
all hypothetical) if a snitch caught wind and set him up to be arrested
a leader will be lost.
Comrades I encourage you to think about the implications of letting
these kinds of people into our rank and file. Long live the revolution.
MIM(Prisons) responds: This writer raises an important point
about who we can organize with. A comrade in Virginia wrote in with
similar concerns:
“Individuals lose sight that to these bigotry-minded organizations we
are stupid. They feel as tho we need them to survive. I don’t agree with
that at all, ULK and all the brothers and sisters make it work and it
means so much to me that we have this movement. If these oppressors know
our lessons and remedies for the oppression we hope to stop it will be
so much harder for us to stand against this imperialist movement they
run daily.
”Just because they say they want to help does not
mean that’s their goal. See when they start sentencing whites to harsh
treatment as they do our people daily and blanket the way we are
oppressed then I can say their actions show they want to help us. It’s
not the case of wanting to help us it’s about them gaining intel on our
movement, so for that I disagree with any movement of this struggle
joining forces with oppressive white groups.”
Both these writers express concerns that undermine our position against
coalition-based organizing in favor of building united fronts. Below we
explain the difference between united front and coalition organizing,
and we encourage our readers to write in with your thoughts if you think
this distinction would resolve the concerns presented above. Below we
make generalizations about the two modes of collaboration, but of course
there may be some coalitions that operate more similar to a united front
and vice versa.
In united front organizing, various organizations come together to work
on a specific goal or project. All the organizations maintain their
independence, which is a very important distinction from coalition
building. So in a united front, white supremacist groups could maintain
their bigoted views and their ultimate goal to undermine our
self-determination. At the same time, liberatory organizations maintain
our politics of anti-imperialism, anti-amerikkkanism, equality for all,
etc.
On the other hand, in the coalition model, the groups are supposed to
agree on and uphold the ideology of the coalition, which usually forces
the more progressive grous to water down their line on the issue.
Talking points are chosen and orgs in the coalition are supposed to
stick to the talking points.
For example, if we enter into a united front with a prison reformist
group which has a goal of reforming the prison system within capitalism,
we will not tell them that they must agree with the need to overthrow
capitalism in order to resolve the problems they are trying to fix. They
also can’t force us to advertise that a series of reforms, while keeping
capitalism and U.$.A. intact, is what we need to end oppression within
prisons. Each organization is able to push the agenda of the united
front (in this case, that Amerikan prisons are terrible) while putting
our own analysis on the issue. In a coalition on the same topic, there
is usually a greater unity of political line, which often means the line
of the most progressive orgs are put on the back back back burner. All
the groups don’t agree we need revolution, so revolution is not allowed
in the campaign.
To the writer in Virginia’s concerns, about the security of our movement
if we allow oppressor-nation lumpen organizations to gain intel on our
inner-functions, we believe that first an accurate assessment must be
made to figure out if these groups actually do have a genuine interest
in the goals of the collaboration. If that assessment is accurate, then
working together in a united front, focused specifically on a particular
goal or task, should help protect us from these attacks because the
information that needs to be shared is much more limited. The level of
unity required is much more limited. The conversation is focused on
“what will we do about this one particular problem?” and each group’s
practical contribution to the campaign is left to itself to carry out.
So we disagree with the Delaware comrade’s definition of a united front
as being united on all points. Instead we see it as united against a
specific enemy or to achieve a specific goal. But let’s disregard
semantics for a moment, and ask if these comrades believe we should
still not work with opppressor-nation lumpen orgs, even if we use an
independence-based united front model? Why or why not, and what examples
can we look to to help us make this analysis? Would we be able to
achieve our goals even if we have a policy to never have tactical unity
with oppressor-nation groups?
More on security. Obviously snitches are dangerous to revolutionaries.
However, people can be reformed. It is possible someone in prison got a
reduced sentence for ratting out someone else. But once in prison they
might come into contact with revolutionaries who educate them on the
importance of unity amongst the oppressed and they are self-critical
about their actions and resolve to never act against the oppressed
again. We should not shun this persyn forever, but instead encourage
their transformation and embrace genuine change.
We also call out the question of “convicted and known” rapists. Who is
doing the convicting? Why do we trust the criminal injustice system to
tell us who is a rapist? New Afrikan men accused of raping white wimmin
are likely to be convicted, regardless of the facts. Accepting
conviction as truth is something every prisoner knows to be dangerous.
And so we ask why this conviction is an acceptable measure for rape? Of
course anyone who advocates gender oppression or believes it is their
right to sexually assault others will have fundamental disagreements
with us. But we can’t just trust the state to tell us who are our
friends and who are our enemies.
It is perhaps one of the biggest challenges for the oppressed to build a
United Front against a principal enemy, overcoming the divisions put on
us by the imperialists, and identifying allies even in the face of
significant and fundamental disagreements over certain important issues.
I’m writing to y’all from the Special Management Unit (SMU) in Jackson,
Georgia which is about ten minutes outside Atlanta. This is my second
correspondence to MIM(Prisons) and the type of prison I’m at seems to be
a focus of yours. It is classified as a “Tier 3” SMU, housing the
“worst” 190 captives in the Department of Corrections, which boasts an
insane 70,000 prisoners throughout the whole state.
These people are so very corrupt. Just a few hours ago, the pigs, mostly
Black, took the Muslim boy out of the cell next to mine for a “meeting.”
Those meetings go on in a side room somewhere and usually they end in
brutality. When they were bringing him back they were beating him as
they dragged him toward his cell. It’s on camera if the cameras in the
cell house actually record.
When they got him into his cell I could hear him choking and trying to
scream. Also, I could hear what sounded like fists or feet hitting skin.
He was in handcuffs and shackles. I’m Aryan Nation and my loyalty is to
my people, but I’ve got the sense to know that if they’ll do that to my
neighbor they’ll do it to me. My modus operandi (M.O.) is
brutal violence toward police and other convicts. So when I spoke up and
said that if they didn’t stop torturing that man where I could hear it I
would stab or cut every pig that came to my door at every meal, they
stopped beating him. This type of stuff is the norm at Jackson SMU.
I want to emphasize the importance of unity behind these walls. We
divide ourselves by race and gangs and the pigs throw gasoline on the
fire. Just today a Black officer called me a “fake white supremacist”
for sending a Blood (Black guy) some books and magazines.
I’ve picked up on some undertones in MIM literature that targets whites
as the enemy or people responsible for the oppression behind the
injustice system. It’s not just whites anymore; it’s Black, white,
Hispanic, Asian, etc. The prison injustice system is a mindset that
can’t be defined by race. We’ve got to point the finger at the mindset,
not the groups of people that we want to blame.
Every prison I go to I preach unity and people respond, because if the
Aryan Nation is willing to unite then nobody else has any excuse. Race
is the biggest problem in the South; it’s what divides us the most. I’ve
done time in the Midwest and those prisons have overcome racial
division. We may eat at separate tables there, and play sports on
separate courts, but when it’s time to come together for our rights
there are no racial, religious, or gang lines.
I don’t know much about Maoism but I know about the struggle that your
ministry is fighting against; I’ve been living it for almost eight
years. I’ve written to y’all to try to inspire unity amongst everybody,
not just the non-whites. I passed on the only ULK I’ve received
so I don’t remember your mission statement, but I do understand a little
and I support y’all and respect what I do understand. Please continue to
send me ULK. I’ll write after every issue just to put my views
in on the struggle. Also, I’ll be sending in 10-20 stamps as a donation
very soon.
MIM(Prisons) adds: Just as oppressed nation people have
integrated into Amerika economically, they have integrated into the
police and prison staff, as well as other parts of the criminal
injustice system. The United $tates even had a Black president; it’s
obvious that oppressed vs. oppressor is not split on “color” lines.
Still, there is a history and present reality that shows Amerikkka is
vastly a white oppressor nation.
For those who have integrated into the oppressor nation, we no longer
refer to them as New Afrikan; instead they are “African-Amerikkkans.”
Our opposition to oppressors is not limited to just those of European
descent. But we see that national oppression happens with an oppressor
nation on top (the predominantly and historically white Amerikkkan
nation) and others on the bottom (oppressed nations) and so we do make
scientific generalizations about these nations.
We’re with this comrade that our unity also can’t be limited by identity
politics. We don’t exclude potential comrades just because they’re
Amerikan, and we don’t trust potential comrades just because they’re
not. Those who do come from an oppressor nation will need to commit
nation suicide and work against the interests of their nation. Those who
come from oppressed nations need to show that they are not trying to
simply integrate with the oppressors, like the Corrections Officers this
comrade refers to. Those integrators are our enemies just like the
Amerikkkan oppressors are our enemies.