MIM Notes 192 August 15 1999

Letters

NRA and government hypocrisy

Dear MIM,

I know that we have no rights only power struggles, and I know that the 
National Rifle Association (NRA) is not a progressive organization by 
any stretch of the imagination, nor is the NRA lobbyists for prisoners' 
rights. But yet you have prisoners (under the influence of Ohio's 
Fascist Prison Network) in Ohio who have nothing better to do than sit 
around mimicking the words of the NRA. They claim that the only reason 
why the "Jewish controlled" media is publicizing so much gun violence is 
so the government can take away the right to bear arms.

These fascist wanna-bes act as if they don't realize that the government 
has already take away their rights to bear arms, and if any ex-convict 
went to an NRA meeting with a gun in their hand, the NRA would 
confiscate their weapon at gun point and hold them there until the 
police came to haul them off back to prison.

Now, if the NRA was truly a progressive organization (whether they liked 
prisoners or not) they would be taking Amerikkka to task on the issue of 
the fact that there is nothing in the constitution that says once a 
person is convicted of a crime, that person (forever) loses their 
constitutional right to bear arms.

-- a prisoner in Ohio, 5 June1999

P.S. This institution made me send all the books sent by MIM home but 
under the pressure of outside lawyers, they are reviewing their policy 
of not allowing non-religious books.

MIM responds:  We'd add to this that not only does the government take 
away former prisoner's rights to bear arms, but it also takes away their 
vote, and it takes away their ability to get housing or a job by 
branding them for life with the label criminal. The government is 
passing more and more laws which re-incarcerate prisoners who have 
served their time. This is taking away prisoners' supposed right to live 
outside of prison once their time is served. MIM received the following 
in response to our work to end the imperialist death grip of debt on 
Third World countries in conjunction with the Jubilee 2000 movement. 

More info on Jubilee 2000 campaign

Dear MIM,

First, there were four sums of money discussed [by the imperialists as 
amounts of Third World debt to forgive]: a) $30b: Original HIPC 
proposal; Jubilee 2000 doesn't count this. b) $25b: Early agreement 
achieved by Jubilee 2000. c) $25b: increase proposed by Gordon Brown (19 
Feb 99) d) $20b: further increase proposed by Clinton (22 Mar 99) "Total 
debts of the 52 countries identified for assistance by Jubilee 2000 
amount to $371b", almost 4 times the grand total. A cynical view of 
HIPC: IMF/WB recognized they would never recover the $30b. So they 
decided to try to get something for it: Structural Adjustment Programs 
(SAPs).

SAPs help the 1st world: they keep wages low, force the 3rd world to 
produce cash crops for export, this reduces global prices on 1st world 
imports.

The West installed the dictators. The West loaned them the money. The 
West should take the losses.

-- a supporter in the east.

MIM responds:  We print this letter because it helps to make clear that 
the imperialists are trying to look good by saying they will give debt 
relief to the poorest countries but in fact they are offering to forgive 
only the amount of money that will never be repaid regardless of what 
they do. And in exchange for this, the imperialists are insisting on 
harsh Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) which will give them greater 
economic and political control over these Third World countries while 
further impoverishing these countries.

But we would add that there is no real loss to be taken by the West: 
while a small number of loans will not be repaid with interest, the West 
was not lending money to Third World countries just to make money off 
the interest. These loans gave imperialist countries significant control 
over the economies of the Third World countries. The imperialist 
countries were able to take natural resources, dictate import and export 
policies, and create conditions favorable to imperialist corporations 
who went in and set up factories which exploited the labor of the 
people. In some countries the gain was strategic military bases or 
military alliances. Overall, even if the loans from some countries are 
never paid off, the net gain will be on the side of the imperialists.