This is an archive of the former website of the Maoist Internationalist Movement, which was run by the now defunct Maoist Internationalist Party - Amerika. The MIM now consists of many independent cells, many of which have their own indendendent organs both online and off. MIM(Prisons) serves these documents as a service to and reference for the anti-imperialist movement worldwide.
MIM Notes 279 · April 1, 2003 · Page 1
MIM Notes
April 1, 2003, Nº 279
The Official Newsletter of the Maoist Internationalist Movement (MIM)
INSIDE: What's up with the French? * Under Lock & Key * Una Página en Español...
Statement of
regarding the
Iraq War
by the International Minister
March 19, 2003
oday, with the long war against
Iraq just having expanded into
Baghdad with the first missile
attacks after the deadline in Bush's
ultimatum to Iraq, MIM mourns in
advance the loss of life in Iraq. Whether
the United $tates wins in a day or
whether the Iraqi people grind out a war
that turns a five or six digit figure of
aggressor troops into dust, the loss of life
in Iraq is unnecessary. Our species can
do better, but it will take a global
No moral grounds
While even the reactionary Pope and
French President Chirac have condemned
this war, it is obvious it has no "moral
grounds," no matter what one's
upbringing. After all, Chirac is from the
same reactionary wing of imperialism as
Bush. Chirac comes from the French
version of the U.$. Republican Party.
The bottom line is that peace in the
world depends on an internationalist
viewpoint's conquering the species. The
kernel of that idea can be expressed in
Christian terms as the "golden rule." It
means placing oneself in the shoes of the
"other guy." As long as the principle of
internationalism applied as a "golden rule"
among nations is ignored, we will be stuck
in "what-goes-around-comes-around"
terrorism and war.
This does not mean we are pacifists. It
means that Bush's violence does not
contribute to internationalist answers.
Rather Bush's violence is partly fear-
mongering panic about weapons of mass
destruction. Yet weapons of mass
destruction are merely a symptom. Bush's
supporters often say "guns don't kill
people; people do." There are reasons
people create weapons of mass
destruction and use them as in Hiroshima
and Nagasaki and Bush has never
addressed the causes of war except by
making them worse.
Violence that prevents violence: a
scientific question
What Bush does is a perfect example
For more coverage of anti-war protests, see pages 4 and 5. An article
discussing France's opposition to the war starts on page 3. For continuing
coverage of the war and anti-war activism, check
Block Patriot
Act II's
march to
hile Bush and his war council
prepare to bomb Iraq, John
Ashcroft's minions have put
together a second Patriot Act -- a laundry
list civil liberties they want to get rid of.
The new law is officially called the
Domestic Security Enhancement Act, and
MIM condemns its fascist goals and calls
on all people to see that it does not become
We only know of the DSEA's existence
because someone leaked it to the press.
The so-called Justice Department said
after the leakage that it would be
"derelict" if it were not "continually
considering anti-terrorism measures." Yet
this same office has yet to give Congress
any report on the first Patriot Act and its
effectiveness in preventing terrorism. Just
as the USA Patriot Act was in the works
before 911, and was made into law with
What does defending Stalin have
to do with opposing war in Iraq?
Aside from the fact that his last public
speech said, "down with the
warmongers," we defend Stalin
because we are for socialism--and
not just when it drops from Heaven.
Read more on pages 3 and 7.
Continued on page 6...
Continued on page 9...
Thousands march against war in D.C.
Continued on page 5...
March 15, 2003
Demonstrators took more than 2,500
copies of MIM Notes in the Washington
DC rally against the war in Iraq and
RAIL tabled and distributed MIM Theory
as well. It may be appropriate at this
moment to thank President Bush for
exposing the war-mongering nature of the
system and taking the Democratic Party
with him into this war.
The unity of the imperialists has left
the political field open to the real anti-
militarists, the people who are really going
to bring global peace. In ordinary times,
the imperialists conceal their wars against
the Third World. Ironically, without the
imperialists' going berserk, we could not
have so many demonstrators. Police said
40,000 attended while organizers from
International A.N.S.W.E.R. said it was
100,000 participants. (1)
Supporting Democrats not realism
Despite the Democrats' voting for the
war in Congress, and despite the fact that
major candidates for president Kerry,
Lieberman, Gephardt and Edwards all
support the war--participants in the DC
rally continued to hold many illusions about
the Democratic Party. In fact, one of the
speakers at the rally called for electing
candidates to replace Bush & Co. and
then called for revolution in almost the
same breath.
As we go to press, the the Democratic
Party Senate Leader Daschle has
criticized Bush for failing in diplomacy,
"miserably."(2) Others have criticized
Bush for not having enough allies to go to
war with international legitimacy.
Our movement needs to distinguish
arguments that help Bush do a better job
making war on the world and those
arguments that are necessary for global
peace. Democrats in 95% of cases are
making arguments about how Bush could
make war better. With the exception of
some mention of Sport Utility Vehicles
(SUVs), Democrats rarely attempt to
address the causes of war and terrorism.
Democrats failed the Iraq test as they
have failed countless other less-publicized
questions of war and peace. What is
more--even "peaceful" Democrats
MIM Notes 279 · April 1, 2003 · Page 2
What is MIM?
The Maoist Internationalist Movement (MIM) is the collection of existing or emerging
Maoist internationalist parties in the English-speaking imperialist countries and their English-
speaking internal semi-colonies, as well as the existing or emerging Maoist Internationalist
parties in Belgium, France and Quebec and the existing or emerging Spanish-speaking
Maoist Internationalist parties of Aztlan, Puerto Rico and other territories of the U.$. Empire.
MIM Notes is the newspaper of MIM. Notas Rojas is the newspaper of the Spanish-speaking
parties or emerging parties of MIM. MIM upholds the revolutionary communist ideology
of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and is an internationalist organization that works from the
vantage point of the Third World proletariat. MIM struggles to end the oppression of all
groups over other groups: classes, genders, nations. MIM knows this is only possibly by
building public opinion to seize power through armed struggle. Revolution is a reality for
North America as the military becomes over-extended in the government's attempts to
maintain world hegemony. MIM differs from other communist parties on three main
questions: (1) MIM holds that after the proletariat seizes power in socialist revolution, the
potential exists for capitalist restoration under the leadership of a new bourgeoisie within
the communist party itself. In the case of the USSR, the bourgeoisie seized power after the
death of Stalin in 1953; in China, it was after Mao's death and the overthrow of the "Gang
of Four" in 1976. (2) MIM upholds the Chinese Cultural Revolution as the farthest advance
of communism in humyn history. (3) As Marx, Engels and Lenin formulated and MIM has
reiterated through materialist analysis, imperialism extracts super-profits from the Third
World and in part uses this wealth to buy off whole populations of oppressor nation so-
called workers. These so-called workers bought off by imperialism form a new petty-
bourgeoisie called the labor aristocracy. These classes are not the principal vehicles to
advance Maoism within those countries because their standards of living depend on
imperialism. At this time, imperialist super-profits create this situation in the Canada, Quebec,
the United $tates, England, France, Belgium, Germany, Japan, Italy, Switzerland,
Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Israel, Sweden and Denmark. MIM accepts people as
members who agree on these basic principles and accept democratic centralism, the system
of majority rule, on other questions of party line.
"The theory of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin is universally applicable. We should
regard it not as dogma, but as a guide to action. Studying it is not merely a matter of
learning terms and phrases, but of learning Marxism-Leninism as the science of revolution."
- Mao Zedong, Selected Works, Vol. II, p. 208.
Editor, MC206; Production, MC12
MIM Notes
The Official Newsletter of The Maoist Internationalist Movement
ISSN 1540-8817
MIM Notes is the bi-weekly newsletter of the Maoist Internationalist Movement. MIM
Notes is the official Party voice; more complete statements are published in our journal,
MIM Theory. Material in MIM Notes is the Party's position unless noted. MIM Notes
accepts submissions and critiques from anyone. The editors reserve the right to edit
submissions unless permission is specifically denied by the author; submissions are
published anonymously unless authors insist on identification (prisoners are never
identified by name). MIM is an underground party that does not publish the names of its
comrades in order to avoid the state surveillance and repression that have historically
been directed at communist parties and anti-imperialist movements. MCs, MIM comrades,
are members of the Party. The Revolutionary Anti-Imperialist League (RAIL) is an anti-
imperialist mass organization led by MIM (RCs are RAIL Comrades). MIM's ten-point
program is available to anyone who sends in a SASE.
The paper is free to all prisoners, as long as they write to us every 90 days to confirm
their subsciptions. There are no individual subscriptions for people outside prison.
People who want to receive newspapers should become sponsors and distributors.
Sponsors pay for papers, distributors get them onto the streets, and officers do both
distribution and financial support. Annual cost is: 12 copies (Priority Mail), $120; 25
(Priority Mail), $150; 50 (Priority Mail), $280; 100, $380; 200, $750; 900 (Express
Mail), $3,840; 900 (8-10 days), $2,200. To become a sponor or distributor, send
anonymous money orders payable to "MIM." Send to MIM, attn: Camb. branch, PO Box
400559, Cambridge, MA 02140. Or write [email protected]
Most back issues of MIM Notes are available free on our web site. The web site con-
tains thousands of documents, with ordering information for many more.
MIM grants explicit permission to copy all or part of this newspaper for any reason, as
long as we are credited.
For general correspondence, contact:
P.O. Box 29670
Los Angeles, CA 90029-0670
eMail: <[email protected]>
WWW: <http//>
What about the micro-
states in the Gulf?
Dear Comrade,
I have a question regarding Maoism
which I think you'd probably be well
placed to answer.
Clearly the Chinese revolution against
the decaying imperial past was made
possible because the vast majority of
Chinese lived in poverty under the yoke
of a self-serving and incompetent clique.
But what is Maoism's, and the MIM's
view of countries that don't have a
working class? Before rejecting this as a
non-issue, by claiming that there is no such
country--consider states such as
Monaco, Liechtenstein, and the wealthy
Gulf States of Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar,
Oman and the United Arab Emirates.
These are tiny oil-rich sheikhdoms in
which virtually every citizen is a
millionaire, there is no tax, and all services
are provided free, courtesy of the
fantastic wealth of the Emir. Qatar has
only 50,000 nationals, all of whom are part
of the ruling al-Thani clan, the head of
which is the emir. They are all wealthy.
There is no agricultural sector. There is
virtually no opposition to the Islamic
absolute monarchy which seems to
provide such stability, peace and
prosperity for all.
In such circumstances, how is even
bourgeois socialism, let alone
revolutionary Marxist-Leninist-Maoism to
flourish? It's totally different from
somewhere like Iraq or Iran, where real
social disadvantage brought down the
In short, how does MIM see revolution
ever coming to tiny oil-rich states of
fantastic wealth and devout Islam?
--Reader from London, England,
March 2003
International Minister replies: We
would say that where whole geographies
are bought-off, we do not have to respect
those borders. Liechtenstein is rich thanks
to the people it exploits abroad and there
is nothing wrong with mobilizing those
people against Liechtenstein. In many
senses, we have a global struggle against
u.$. imperialism anyway.
The Gulf states are also in considerable
contradiction, because they face
continuous threat from the hyper-power
united $tates, which is unsure about how
much independence to allow these states.
The national bourgeoisie of the oil-rich
states has in many cases no choice but to
turn to a global proletariat to defend it
against the predations of u.$. imperialism.
Far from denying that there is not a
proletariat in every country, MIM spends
much time battering ossified "Marxism"
which prevails numerically in the
imperialist countries. The principal
significance of u.$. imperialism and its
exploitation is not within its own borders.
The total surplus-value extracted outside
u.$. borders by u.$. imperialism far
exceeds the surplus-value extracted
within u.$. borders. The exploited of the
world need to settle accounts with u.$.
imperialism even more than the exploited
minority within u.$. borders.
The U.S. is an
overrated prize
Thank you for the MIMs, especially the
back issues that had specific articles on
Korea. There is no doubt the subject of
Korea will be on everyone's minds and
lips. I can only hope that some good will
come out of this mess. It amazes me, with
all the possible implications (of Iraq and
now Korea) that the U.S. will still drive
forward thinking that it is their "right" to
corner anyone they'd like. History has
proven that no matter how powerful a
country or what technological advances
they may have... it is these same
characgeristics that not only drive them
to war (believing they cannot lose) but
ultimately turns out to be their Achilles
heel. Super-weapons that ultimately take
up too many resources, or drives to gain
new territory only to be unable to control
it. I believe the U.S. is an over-rated prize
fighter... a very strong first attack but in
the event of a protracted war the aura of
invincibility will quickly dissipate. And the
tragedy is that this will not be learned
cheaply but will cost a very high price in
--A Pennsylvania prisoner
MIM Notes 279 · April 1, 2003 · Page 3
In the recent split between President
Chirac of France and President Bush,
there is much speculation on the oil
business that France has going in Iraq.
The propaganda story goes that since
1991, France has gone to Iraq to obtain
deals for future oil business while Uncle
$am has stayed aside in a moralistic huff,
not wishing to make money from such a
dishonorable business, especially while
U.N. sanctions are still in place.
MIM is not going to say it knows all of
what is behind the alignment of France-
Germany-Russia-China against a war
with Iraq as of March 6th. In Lenin's
theory of imperialism, it is only a matter
of time after the previous war before
imperialists find economic competition
pushing them toward new blocs for new
However, the Washington Post has
accurately laid some ideas to rest: "Iraq
is a relatively tiny trading partner for
France, accounting for just three-tenths
of a percent of French imports and two-
tenths of a percent of exports. France
buys about 8 percent of Iraq's oil, making
it Baghdad's fourth-largest customer.
The biggest customer, the United States,
buys 56 percent."
"In any case, French officials say, the
United States is a far more important
economic partner for France than is Iraq,
so why would the government risk
angering Washington for business with
Baghdad? Also, they say, if the question
were simply future oil contracts, France
would do better to support war now and
position itself to win oil concessions from
a grateful post-Hussein government."(1)
The French also sent 10,000 troops and
100 aircraft in 1991's version of Bush
vs. Hussein. Hence all the crude
conservative Amerikan jokes and
innuendos miss what is going on with
It could be that the imperialists
themselves do not know why they are
splitting when they normally unite in
business interests against the Third World.
The imperialists may be weighing their
options and interests as they go along in
this world without a Soviet super-power.
Chirac said, "`Any community with only
one dominant power is always a dangerous
one,' he said. `That's why I favor a
multipolar world, in which Europe
obviously has its place.'"(1)
The diplomatic activity of France
certainly points toward Africa, where
Chirac has recently had a string of
diplomatic victories. President of Algeria,
Abdelaziz Bouteflika said that Chirac will
deserve the Nobel Peace Prize if war
with Iraq does not occur.(2)
As MIM Notes 271 reported in "France
swallows imperialist trade privilege,"
France eliminated a bone of contention
within Europe when it agreed to let its
subsidies to agriculture become
proportionately smaller over a time, a
sticking point when it came to actually
achieving "free trade" within the
European Union.
Once Chirac swallowed the big pill to
tide things over with Germany and the
rest of the European Union, he started
using his new French attitude to flail
England (for not paying its fair share to
the EU) and the United $tates (for
wrecking Third World agriculture with
similar unfair subsidies to U.$. monopoly
corporations, to the tune of $190 in 10
France is serious about multi-polar world,
but French economic ties to U.$. are huge
By Santa Barbara RAIL
Barbara chapter of the Revolutionary
Anti-Imperialist League led a number of
organizations in denouncing the University
of California police department's fear-
mongering "security" policies. The police
suggested campus organizations prevent
students from bringing backpacks to
extra-curricular events. They also
recommended that organizations search
all people attending their events. These
requests followed the Bush
administration's declaration of "orange
alert status" during the Islamic Hajj.
RAIL rejected the proposed "security"
policies as a psy-war tactic to erode
resistance to U.$. military action against
Iraq and the destruction of civil rights at
home. The Santa Barbara RAIL chapter
drafted a statement refusing to comply
with security ordinances as ridiculous as
those proposed by the UCPD now or in
the future. The statement of non-
compliance was signed by 15 other
campus organizations (see page 9). SB
RAIL recommends that this model be
repeated in other communities in order
to create a strong anti-imperialist
opposition to complying with bogus
"security" measures.
The same day the statement of non-
Santa Barbara students reject bogus "security" policies
compliance was published in the UCSB
student newspaper, RAIL hosted an
educational event on civil liberties.
Speakers from MIM, Santa Barbara
RAIL, and radical campus groups such
as A.S.I.A.N.! and the Muslim Student
Association discussed the Patriot Act, the
implications of the proposed Patriot Act
II (see article on page 1), the INS special
registration program and the history of
Japanese internment.
While the Department of Homeland
Security website claims the " DHS is ...
dedicated to protecting the rights of
American citizens," its actions thus far
have done nothing of the sort. The Patriot
Act II is set to cut civil rights ranging from
freedom of speech to the right against
unreasonable search and seizure.
According to Patriot Act II, even doing
lawful work with a group the U.$.
executive labels "terrorist" could result
in loss of citizenship. The INS
Registration program targets males of
Muslim and Middle Eastern descent,
causing unjustified deportation and
Signatories to the statement of non-
compliance pledged that they would not
be frightened into giving up their civil rights
or their ability to organize against the state
without its approval.
MIM released a longer version of
this statement on March 5th. --ed.
Today we mark the 50th anniversary
of the death of Stalin, the great Soviet
leader (1924 to 1953) followed by
bourgeois degenerates and incompetents
who restored capitalism in the Soviet
Union. Amongst all communist leaders,
Stalin has received the greatest
fascination in the imperialist countries with
countless newspaper articles and 800
page books written about him.
Croatian Ivica Kostelic won a World
Cup skiing race in January, 2003 and said
Nazism was a "healthy system" and that
Stalin was worse than Hitler, because
Stalin supposedly killed people at random.
People throughout eastern Europe are
coming out with similar Nazi leanings.(1)
Kostelic's Austrian bank sponsor was not
pleased with the public relations fiasco,(2)
but the fact remains that Kostelic's
opinions are common in territory ranging
from the Baltics to the Balkans, where
local hatreds trumped everything else and
made it fair game to side with Hitler or
Mussolini to kill off whatever ethnic
group was out of favor. Let's not forget
that during World War II, with German
help and the Pope's blessings, the Croats
committed genocide. According to
Vatican historian John Cornwell, there
were only 2 million Orthodox Christian
Serbs, and the Croats led by Catholic
priests managed to kill 487,000 of them
between 1941 and 1945 in addition to
27,000 Gypsies and 30,000 out of 45,000
Jews. Then the press wonders why
Kostelic says he prepared for his skiing
race as if he were a Nazi soldier in 1941.
We can already hear the Croats saying
our message is one-sided, and that Serbs
commit genocide too. While Amerikkkan
politics have unimaginable depth in their
parasitism, Eastern European politics fall
into an endless trap of provincialism.
Somehow, the small nations in that region
always manage to blame their neighbors
for all the world's evils, and through petty
thinking, genocide always ends up being
the solution in the eyes of people in
Eastern Europe.
For the Eastern Europeans MIM has a
message: Stalin and his line was the
greatest factor bringing peace and
harmony to your region. The proof is what
happens when he is gone. All your
minorities living without rights, all your
ethnic cleansing and all your wars are
fights amongst the proletariat. They can
do nothing to advance anything. Yes, Stalin
organized repressive violence, but when
he did, the whole region was moving
The United $tates and the phony
communist movement does not want
Eastern Europeans to know that the
riches of the West come from super-
exploitation. The imperialists say that
ordinary proletarians can live the life
Amerikkkans live without exploiting
others under capitalism. That is a lie.
Right now you Eastern Europeans think
that your neighbors are exploiting you:
think again. The reason you are not
shopping at Bloomingdale's right now
instead of reading this is that Amerikkkans
and others from the West enjoy luxury at
your expense. Unfortunately, we at MIM
are amongst a minority of people willing
to tell you what is really going on
economically. Only by uniting the
proletariat in Eastern Europe do the
people have a way out of their degraded
material conditions.
Eastern Europe requires repression for
peace. Some day in the future under
dictatorship of the proletariat, the youth
will rebuke the ugly past and the small
nations of Eastern Europe will integrate
and get along. Right now, the fighting and
Marking 50 years since death of Stalin:
What it means to defend Stalin today
Continued on page 7...
MIM Notes 279 · April 1, 2003 · Page 4
CAMBRIDGE, MA March 12 2003--
Harvard Students are stepping up their
efforts against war in Iraq, judging by the
500 people turn-out at the March 12th
rally which was three or four times bigger
than the previous rally. Organized by the
Harvard Initiative for Peace and Justice,
demonstrators showed a diversity of
budding political interests.
Most interesting was a speaker who
mentioned that he had been fighting
hard--up all night arguing before the
rally. It turns out that the Harvard College
Democrats came out against the war--
thereby splitting with the national
leadership of the party.
Another speaker borrowed some
language from the 1960s organization
called SDS to call for a strike. 800 people
have signed up to walk out of classes the
day war starts.
In criticism, MIM would say that the
rally showed the same weaknesses as
others like it across the country. With
global public opinion against the war and
major imperialist powers like France and
Germany throwing up roadblocks, the fact
that we in the united $tates could not stop
that war shows that the quality of our
movement is lacking. Even though the
pro-war and anti-war sides are evenly
matched quantitatively in the united
$tates-- if we count all the "silent
majority" on the status quo's side as public
opinion polls seem to justify -- still we
could not win with favorable global
Staying up all night to raise our political
levels is necessary for us in the united
$tates. We have a lot of ground to make
up. The question remains why College
Democrats still call themselves
Democrats, if they look into this war and
other questions of war and imperialism.
MIM handed out 500 copies of MIM
Harvard students step
it up against the war
San Francisco-- Around 80,000 people
joined the March 15 anti-war protest here.
The numbers at the rally were lower than
other recent protests, but about 2000
people participated in a "break away"
march (not following the permitted route).
Arrests were far more numerous than at
past rallies with close to 200 people
ending up in jail, including several tourists
and movie goers who did nothing more
than end up on the wrong sidewalk at the
wrong time. San Francisco appears to be
criminalizing the act of protesting the war
outside of the confines of a permitted
At the pre-march rally MIM and RAIL
put up a participatory revolutionary art
display. On an Amerikkkan flag we
sprayed painted "No Imperialist Wars!"
and attached RAIL flyers and stickers
opposing the war in Iraq and imperialist
violence. Many people stopped to look at
and take pictures of the display. We
handed out MIM Notes to everyone who
passed by, explaining that the paper
represents our opinion of Amerikan
imperialism and we invited others to
express their opinions on the Amerikan
flag. We had markers, spray paint, a knife
and other supplies on hand. Improvisations
included burning parts of the flag and an
offer by one protester to wipe his ass with
The revolutionary art project was very
popular. Thousands of people stopped to
read what was written on the flag and
many of them stepped up to express their
anger at the Amerikan system. The
majority of rally participants promoted
pacifist or liberal anti-war sentiments. The
revolutionary art project gave us a chance
to introduce these people to an anti-
imperialist perspective through MIM
Notes while uniting with them in
opposition to this war on Iraq. We also
connected the struggle to an action that
even those who did not want to desecrate
the flag could take: we asked people to
sign a petition defending one of the many
victims of the U.$. terror campaign, Jose
Maria Sison, a Filipino revolutionary
leader in exile in the Netherlands.
Overall our revolutionary art project
succeeded in gaining much attention for
the MIM and RAIL literature table and
interest in MIM Notes while also giving
normally passive rally participants an
opportunity to express their views on
imperialism. But we failed to plan for a
way to clearly demarcate our work as a
project of MIM and RAIL. We did attach
copies of MIM Notes to the trees next to
the flag, but the banner above the flag
only read "revolutionary art" so those who
passed by just taking pictures probably
were not aware of our intention. We did
attempt to remedy this problem by
approaching everyone who noticed the
display to offer them MIM Notes and
explain the purpose of the project.
There were a number of people who
wrote statements on the flag that agree
with MIM and RAIL's revolutionary anti-
imperialism including: "capitalism begets
violence", "notice media manipulation by
Bush administration", "O say can you see,
by the imperialist light, how proudly we
murder", "Bush and his crew, international
terrorists" and several statements in
Arabic that translated into support for the
Palestinian peoples right to self-
Several who expressed their opinions
on the flag represented anarchist positions
including those who wrote "No govt." But
the largest group we encountered were
those who didn't see imperialism as the
main enemy. These pacifists or liberals
had a wide range of reasons for opposing
the war on Iraq, from religion to
We also saw a lot of signs blaming or
targeting just President Bush, rather than
the system of imperialism that gives him
power. And even worse, many that
implied George W. is evil only because
his father, Bush Sr., raised him that way.
This individualism leads to misplaced
anger and an incorrect focus on the leader
rather than the system that is causing tens
of thousands of people to die daily.
The strong support for pacifism and
religion was bolstered by actor Martin
Sheen's speech. His introduction was
greeted with loud cheers and a standing
ovation by the mostly seated crowd. He
delivered something of a sermon, calling
on god to grant the activists the power to
stand peacefully in opposition to the war
and praying for strength. During each
pause the crowd continued to cheer.
Anticipating the photographic attention,
and also knowing that police surveillance
at rallies is strong, a few of the MIM and
RAIL activists had their faces covered.
Several people stopped to ask us why we
did this and greeted our explanation that
we intended to make it harder for the
police to repress revolutionaries, with
understanding and support.
The March 12 issue of the San
Francisco Bay Guardian (a local weekly
newspaper) ran an article on undercover
cops monitoring peace protesters. At
recent anti-war rallies, "A group of four
officers assigned to the Violent Crimes
Task Force--a unit that normally handles
gang killings--carried out the undercover
operations. Dressed as protesters, the
squad videotaped the demonstrations and
marched along Market Street in the large
antiwar parades as well as in the smaller,
riotous `breakaway' marches. They also
made a handful of arrests for vandalism."
The article goes on to explain: "The
SFPD established strict guidelines on
surveillance after S.F. cop Tom Gerard,
a former Central Intelligence Agency
operative, was caught spying on Bay Area
leftists in 1992. Working with the Anti-
Defamation League, Gerard had compiled
dossiers on some 7,000 radicals.
"According to the SFPD's spying rules,
which remain in place today, police must
receive written permission from the
MIM and RAIL organize art against the war
`Commanding Officer of the Special
Investigations Division, Deputy Chief of
Investigations and the Chief of Police'
before mounting a surveillance operation.
In the files we reviewed there's no
mention of the appropriate command staff
being involved in the recent undercover
operations. "
Activists should know that it doesn't
matter if the police have policies
supposedly governing their spy
operations. The police and FBI have a
long history of undercover surveillance
and worse including infiltration, disruption
and violence, against anti-imperialist
activists. We can make it harder for them
by disguising ourselves at public events,
refusing to give out unnecessary persynal
information to other people (including our
real names), and taking care using our
phones and internet connections. We
should not let fear keep us from
organizing, but we need to be realistic
about the power the government has and
the existence of spying and
counterintelligence operations.
Protestors make their
opinion of "Old Glory"
known at MIM and RAIL's
revolutionary art exhibit.
MIM Notes 279 · April 1, 2003 · Page 5
Los Angeles
Despite the pouring rain, MIM
distributed more than 300 copies of MIM
Notes with anti-war headlines and built
opposition to the Patriot Act II at a March
15 rally against Amerika's war in Iraq in
Los Angeles. More than 70 people signed
our petition against John Ashcroft's latest
proposed "anti-terror" legislation.
Patriot II (see article page 1) is a bold
fascist power-grab by Ashcroft & co.,
and it is urgent that we shut it down before
the congress has a chance to make it into
law. Demonstrators who had heard of
Patriot Act II (a.k.a. the Domestic
Security Enhancement Act) were grateful
that MIM was offering a way to oppose
it in action. But at least half of the people
MIM spoke with had not heard of the
new Patriot Act before. This is no surprise,
as only a handful of major U.$.
newspapers have covered the story since
someone leaked a copy of the act on
February 7, and most of those papers only
printed one story on it.
A Libertarian at the table next to MIM's
commented that it's a good thing Patriot
II has not yet been introduced in Congress
because as long as it's not on the floor it
can't be voted into law. But this is cold
comfort in the face of the administration's
highly secretive tactics in its "War on
Terror." The USA Patriot Act passed
within hours and days of its introduction
in the two houses of congress--not even
enough time for the congresspeople to
read what they were voting for, let alone
for the public to chime in on the debate.
Revolutionaries, civil libertarians and the
oppressed must spread opposition to the
Patriot Act II now. Our libertarian
neighbor and several other rally-goers
asked for copies of our anti-Patriot II
petition. The rights this legislation would
take away are vital to our ability to
Among other things, the Patriot Act II
would give the executive branch power
to make secret arrests, strip Amerikan
citizenship from anyone who supports
even the lawful activities of so-called
"terrorist" organizations, spy on religious
and other non-criminal groups, view credit
reports without consent or judicial review,
and arrest and extradite citizens and non-
citizens alike to countries with which the
united snakes has no extradition treaties
and without regard for those countries
humyn rights records. Patriot II would
further eliminate checks and balances in
government by barring the courts from
oversight on warrants and wiretaps and
on the enactment of the law overall, and
by voiding existing consent decrees that
tolerate the Bush administration, and
believe it is legitimate to be in a system
where they alternate power with
warmongers attempting to rule the whole
world instead of supporting global majority
rule. In contrast, we believe it is ghastly
to tolerate and accept Bush today--and
for this, the Amerikkkan population, not
just the rulers are to blame.
What the movement inside u.$. borders
needs to understand is that making
arguments that would work in the
Democratic Party may help one obtain
political office, but they do nothing toward
peace. Getting elected in the united $tates
and peace are two separate questions.
What is necessary for peace is in fact
unpopular in the united $tates, but we
cannot change the prerequisites for peace
simply because Amerikkkans are too
busy reading Marie Claire and watching to support a real anti-
war movement in vast numbers. We have
to tell it like it is and hope for change, just
the way a minority of anti-Nazi Germans
had to tell it like it is while gaining the
support of less than 10% of the population
during World War II. Germans in the
1940s should not have supported more
moderate Nazis instead of Hitler as a
matter of being "realistic."
There were a few counter-
demonstrators scattered throughout--a
handful, plus the usual tent for the pro-
war speeches. As the anti-war
demonstration wound down, a bellicose
white male drove up in a car, opened his
window and yelled "we're going to war.
Deal with it!" He was probably the
diplomat Bush sent to France.
The counter-demonstrators focus on
"supporting our troops." Lesson number
one in peace throughout the world has to
be internationalism. If you want peace,
then "our troops" cannot be any more
important than "their troops." At least
since when the united $tates dropped two
atomic bombs on Japan in 1945, the whole
idea that one side of war could win without
taking a risk of being attacked back with
devastating weapons of mass destruction
has been out-dated. What goes around
comes around, so if we cause problems
for "their troops" we are only "asking for
it" ourselves. In this war, both groups of
troops are pawns being sacrificed for
bourgeois rulers.
We are tired of these conservative
counter-demonstrators. We live every
day under threat of terrorism, because
they and their rulers are too narrow-
minded to address the causes of terrorism,
both by the united $tates and lesser
terrorists in the world. Then these
backward counter-demonstrators want us
to applaud their sending troops abroad
where they are "under threat" and end
up stirring up more "terrorism" of
different sorts--including legitimate
responses like George Washington's.
These hypocrites claiming to be oh-so
patriotic ought to know that if George
Washington used violence against
colonialism, then so too, we might expect
MIM petitions against Patriot Act at L.A. rally
require police (including the Feds) to show
that they are acting within the u.$.
Tens of thousands showed up for the
march, but by rally time the crowd had
dwindled a lot as the less energetic or
those who came unprepared for the
drenching rainstorm went home. The
crowd was pretty friendly to MIM Notes,
and as we handed out papers with
headlines "Amerika marches toward War
for Oil!" and "Authority-lovers write
Bush a blank check for War on Iraq" it
was easy to see we were there carrying
the anti-imperialist banner.
One womyn said it was "inappropriate"
to be handing out MIM Notes, and that
this demonstration was not about
"Chinese communism" but about opposing
a war on Iraq. This is rank sectarianism,
when a demonstrator at an anti-war rally
can ignore front-page articles against the
coming war in Iraq and the ongoing wars
against "terrorism" and the rest of the
Third World to say it is wrong to be
distributing these articles in a Maoist
newspaper. You would think someone
telling MIM to get lost with its newspaper
would be distributing their own
newspaper twice as big and with more
material against the war. In fact even from
someone doing more and better work than
MIM, this would be sectarian, but at least
with some work to back it up this claim
would be more than nihilist posturing. It
should be embarrassing to the anti-war
liberals that MIM has to point out that if
anti-war organizing is your priority, you
should be evaluating your friends by their
agitation against the war!
A telephone poll on March 17--taken
right after Bush's ultimatum to Saddam
Hussein to leave Iraq with his sons or be
bombed -- found that 31 percent of
Amerikans were ITAL relieved END at
the prospect of war within the next few
days. 68 percent said the U.$. did all it
could to avert war through diplomatic
channels, and 66 percent support Bush's
decision -- though one in five of this last
group is not convinced going to war is
the right thing to do.(1) That's right, more
than one of every eight Amerikans
surveyed said they are okay with sending
the army to destroy homes, further wreck
the Iraq economy, make more Iraqis
refugees and kill people because George
Bush says so. In a political climate like
this, MIM wants to see as much anti-war
activism out of as many quarters as
the Iraqis to. Until we grant that the whole
world has learned the lesson of George
Washington, we are going to stay stuck
in a pattern of imperialist violence. The
safety of troops abroad is NOT a higher
priority than our safety at home or the
safety of others abroad--whether
Amerikkkan or not. We should not be
manipulated just because the rulers have
succeeded in sending troops already.
Quality of the anti-war movement
The anti-war movement lost not its size
but its quality, because of complacency
of thought and action. Even a large
portion of demonstrators are indifferent
to politics. We see them turning down
leaflets from people and also offering
reasons against war that demonstrate a
lack of political development.
The anti-Bush sentiment in the rallies
comes from the least reliable sectors of
the anti-war movement. Since Democrats
in Congress voted for the war, there is
really no reason to be hearing specifically
anti-Bush sentiment except for that sector
of the movement that just wants Bush to
do a better job making war by having
more military allies and using diplomacy
even more in order to further disarm Iraq
before attacking it.
A 48-year-old ex-Marine held aloft a
huge "Fuck Bush" poster/banner right to
the end of the rally. A teenage youth
confronted him and asked for "respect"
for Bush, while the ex-Marine equally
aggressively asked for respect for
someone who already served his country.
We gathered from the exchange and the
effort that went into the banner, that this
ex-Marine was not one of those tepid anti-
war demonstrators who will bail out of
the anti-war movement when Senator
Kerry continues the war as the next
president. There is definitely a need for
more aggressive types like this one to join
the anti-war movement.
As one speaker noted, in the 1970s,
Bush (and his many ardent war backers)
did not do service in Vietnam. In the
National Guard where even there his
service was under question, Bush was
"busy protecting the skies" "against the
Viet Cong air force." That was a joke,
because the Vietnamese never sent any
air force to attack the United $tates.
The reality is that veterans are on both
sides of this conflict and even troops are
divided into pro-war and anti-war camps.
Hence, the whole question of "respect"
posed by our teenage junior Republican
is misplaced. How to get along with the
rest of the world and the impact of this
war are scientific questions. If an ex-
Marine says this war will only cause more
terrorism, he is not any more or less
correct than a gay millionaire who never
served in the military when he says this
war will only cause more terrorism. If
two people are saying exactly the same
thing, one is not more correct because he
once served the united $tates in battle.
news/update/031503m15rpt.html http://
DC Rally
Continued from page 1...
MIM Notes 279 · April 1, 2003 · Page 6
Militarism is war-mongering or the
advocacy of war or actual carrying out
of war or its preparations.
While true pacifists condemn all
violence as equally repugnant, we
Maoists do not consider self-defense
or the violence of oppressed nations
against imperialism to be militarism.
Militarism is mostly caused by
imperialism at this time. Imperialism
is the highest stage of capitalism--
seen in countries like the United
$tates, England and France.
Under capitalism, capitalists often
profit from war or its preparations.
Yet, it is the proletariat that does the
dying in the wars. The proletariat
wants a system in which people do not
have self-interest on the side of war-
profiteering or war for imperialism.
Militarism is one of the most
important reasons to overthrow
capitalism. It even infects oppressed
nations and causes them to fight each
It is important not to let capitalists
risk our lives in their ideas about war
and peace or the environment. They
have already had two world wars
admitted by themselves in the last 100
years and they are conducting a third
right now against the Third World.
Even a one percent annual chance of
nuclear war destruction caused by
capitalist aggressiveness or "greed" as
the people call it should not be tolerated
by the proletariat. After playing
Russian Roulette (in which the bullet
chamber is different each time and not
related at all to the one that came up in
previous spins) with 100 chambers and
one bullet, the chance of survival is
only 60.5% after 50 turns. In other
words, a seemingly small one percent
annual chance of world war means
eventual doom. After 100 years or turns
of Russian Roulette, the chances of
survival are only 36.6%. After 200
years, survival has only a 13.4%
What is militarism?
of reactionary repressive violence. It
whips up a furor over a symptom and
claims to tidy up after the problem.
Fascism can also be seen as one huge
effort to tidy up the problems created by
capitalism, but fascism cannot succeed
because it cannot let itself know the
sources of its own existence. In contrast,
Abe Lincoln also used repressive
violence, but Lincoln's violence ended up
being progressive repressive violence,
because Lincoln had a plan to eliminate
slavery and other causes of conflict.
Lincoln used violence against a cause of
violence. Bush uses violence that will only
inflame the world's people more. People
who understand this will readily
understand how it is that Stalin violently
repressed so many people but still the life
expectancy of his people doubled. As a
reactionary, Bush has no plan or
capability to use violence to reduce
violence. So absent is a plan to reduce
violence that many have concluded the
real cause of the war is "blood for oil."
When it comes to questions of
international relations and peace, what is
"moral" is what tends to promote species
survival. If I$rael were a "moral" actor,
we would have seen peace in the Middle
East a long time ago, given that I$rael is
much stronger militarily than its existing
and potential enemies in a short-run
conventional sense. Likewise, Bush's
approach to turn the whole Third World
into one giant West Bank cannot succeed
anymore than I$rael's approach.
At first glance the question of war and
peace may seem to divide neatly into
moral and tactical questions. That is
wrong. I$rael is not at peace: that is a
scientific fact. The United $tates spends
more money on the military than the rest
of the world combined and it has the
world's largest economy; yet the United
$tates is subject to terrorist attack from
people who could pick easier targets if
they were opportunist. These are also
scientific facts and they indicate
something about the approach of I$rael
and the United $tates.
Bush tries to address moral concerns
by saying Uncle $am will try to make the
war as short as possible and leave Iraq in
a happy democracy better off than it was
before the war. People with a knowledge
of Iraq or any Third World people's love
of self-determination know why the
United $tates is hated there. It may seem
to be a "tactical" question as to whether
Bush has the capability to bring about
"democracy" in Iraq, but in fact, moral
and tactical (instrumental) questions are
merged. We often hear that ideological
dispute is messier than scientific dispute,
but in this case, the morality of "world
peace" is uncontroversial. The science
of how to bring that about is controversial.
Mourning the death of innocent Iraqis
The Iraqi people are a victim of the
most horrific imperialist power in
history--the United $tates. What Iraqis
seek is self-determination, which is a
natural and healthy motive that George
Washington pursued. That is why the
nationalism of the Iraqi people cannot be
equated with the twisted nationalism of
overfed Amerikkkans who oppose
"French fries" and use that as a
justification to kill Iraqis.
We also mourn those of the U.$. troops
who are too young and foolish to
understand world affairs and why they
die in Iraq--and of course, already some
have died in training for this war.
However, unlike the Iraqis, we can say
that the u.$. troops did at least have a
chance to avoid their fate. Whether they
were watching too much
(which is the leading news website in the
male 18-34 age group) to pay attention to
political matters or whether they read too
many romantic tales of military adventure,
the U.$. troops had the economic
opportunity to educate themselves better
and push their country away from
aggression, but they failed.
Although there is almost no limit to
humyn economic capabilities and growth,
the population of the United $tates is too
busy reading trashy romance novels and
playing video games to consider economic
cooperation that would bring global peace.
Again and again, the Amerikkkan and
I$raeli rulers say that killing Third World
people is the solution to the problem. They
succeed in killing many people including
their own in "friendly fire" while failing
to bring "democracy," peace and
economic cooperation.
In every way, the Amerikan rulers and
the 70% of the Amerikan public that
backs them (1) are "asking for it." It's
clear that Amerikkkans respect nothing
but force--not international law, not the
treaties they signed, not the United
Nations and not the "humyn rights" they
often speak of. The trouble is that these
war-mongers impose their terrorism-
generating system on the rest of us in
North Amerika. Vice-President Bush
under Reagan armed and trained Bin
Laden to fight the Soviet Union. Then the
war-mongering majority waged a war on
Iraq and caused Bin Laden to start
attacking the United $tates; yet the
Amerikkkans don't get it to this day. Now
they want another war on Iraq--and get
this--because of a link of Iraq to
terrorism! No shit, Sherlocks: you created
The stupidity does not end there. Vice-
President Cheney said on March 16th
(and subsequently backed by Bush) that
Iraq has nukes; yet Cheney is exactly the
one who has been pushing for war on
Iraq all along.(2) Talk about asking for it!
The fact is that every single humyn-being
on this planet lives at the tolerance of
other humyn-beings, and this becomes
more true the smaller the planet gets. The
sooner we get that through our skulls, the
better off we will all be.
While some companies make money
selling bombs, we of the U.$.-based
peace movement live under the constant
threat of war and terrorism in retaliation
for what the Amerikan majority did. We
of the minority are tired of their wars for
oil, their backing of I$raeli massacres of
Palestinians every day, their profiteering
on weapons and everything else that
deprives us of a non-negotiable right to
live in peace without terrorism. If the U.$.
imperialist majority wants to change things
("regime change") in Iraq, it can move
there. In democracy, the majority only
determines what happens among those
who voted, not in countries thousands of
miles away. If the Amerikan knucklehead
yahoos want "regime change" in Iraq,
they can move to Baghdad.
We the peace-loving minority have a
non-negotiable right to be free of the
violence caused by the majority's desire
to remake the world in the image of
Ronald McDonald. If they want a war to
Statement of principles regarding the Iraq War
remove the veil from Afghanistan's
wimmin, and they think they know how
to do it, the Amerikkkans should move
there. If Amerikkkans don't want Kim
Jong-il to produce nuclear weapons for
profit, we'd suggest that they get out there
and bid higher for those weapons than
other bidders, because there is no other
logic within the capitalist system.
Whatever these Amerikkkans want to do,
they should do it without endangering
anyone else's non-negotiable rights to
886806.asp; see also Reuters published
Mar 17 2003. http://
Continued from page 1...
San Francisco protestors blocked streets March 15 (MIM Photo).
MIM Notes 279 · April 1, 2003 · Page 7
oppression in Eastern Europe represents
the worst "false consciousness" on the
planet with proletarians killing proletarians
and imagining that Hitler was only as bad
or even better than Stalin. At all costs,
the Eastern European people need to
obtain a bigger perspective.
In the 1960s, the Western bourgeoisie
blamed all evil on Stalin and continued
that practice right up to the present
decade, as an excuse for any failure in
Russia and the neighboring republics.
Today, if something good happens in the
former Soviet Union, we can be sure to
hear the propagandists credit capitalism,
but if anything bad happens, the mention
of Stalin's name is sure to follow;
although, he has been dead 50 years. That
is a product of the Cold War, as is the
ethnic cleansing in ex-Yugoslavia-- an
event that occurred thanks to a loss of
Stalin's approach in the region, especially
Yugoslavia where Tito abandoned Stalin
after World War II and implemented
"local control" economically which led to
local chauvinism and genocide in one of
the clearest examples of how the relations
of production affect the culture and
politics in society.
The Russian Maoist Party has recently
pointed out that Stalin is still relevant
today, not least of all because his last
public speech said, "down with the
warmongers." In his last years of life,
Stalin opposed capitalist militarism and the
decline of individual liberties in the West.
We would also like to explain why we
seek to keep what many see as an
albatross around our necks, because
people ask so often. We could defend
individual liberties and oppose militarism
without invoking Stalin's name our critics
would say. Invoking his name only kills
our cause against militarism and for
individual liberties they say.
Today, defending Stalin does not reflect
any obsession with any particular detail
of history. We can say that none of
MIM's founders had any experience living
under Stalin, and MIM holds no nostalgia
for him the way tens of millions do in the
ex-Soviet Union today.
As with any other historical period or
figure, there will be those who become
involved as a matter of fetishism. There
are countless Trotskyist and ultra-left
Marxist groups saying History basically
ended in defeat in the 1920s. That is what
interests them, the 1920s and the first
socialist revolution--and that's pretty
much it.
While history is of life-and-death
importance, we are not history buffs. We
do not look into history merely to stimulate
our brains or because we like one
particular idea or leader.
The real meaning of defending Stalin is
that we are for socialism, not just when it
drops from Heaven, not when the people
simultaneously and spontaneously realize
the virtues of socialism and not only when
there is no repression or violence. The
vilification of Stalin is very much akin to
the vilification of Abe Lincoln during the
U.S. Civil War, which was a most ugly
but necessary thing.
There is a vast petty-bourgeois flirtation
with socialism. Hardly anyone opposes
communism "in theory" as the colloquial
phrase goes. The trouble is that the half-
hearted support of socialism is what kills
it today and provides a camouflage for
imperialism, which generates social-
democratic reforms in the imperialist
countries while imposing violent super-
exploitation in the Third World.
We defend Stalin, because we know
Stalin did not invent the troubles of our
species in getting to socialism. It took a
war to end slavery in the united $tates
less than 150 years ago. How can any
humyn then claim that what Stalin did was
so extraordinarily repressive and
unnecessary? The Russian slaves fought
Napoleon less than 200 years ago for the
right to remain slaves while Napoleon
offered freedom for the slaves and an
advance into capitalism. Obviously if 200
years ago Russian slaves fought a major
war against Napoleon and did not gain
their freedom by so doing, the humyn
species is less than perfect, less than
Divinely placed. The thousands of years
of struggle against slavery is a tell-tale
sign that anyone saying that advance is
easy or a matter of spontaneous
Enlightenment screwed up by occasional
bad individuals like Stalin does not live
much in this world.
Yes, of course it is possible to build
socialism in such a way as to fail and go
farther backward than capitalism. There
is no factual basis for saying that is true
in Stalin's case. Stalin's critics often talk
about Stalin as if he were a relatively
backward political leader of his time. Quite
the contrary, Stalin stood alone against
fascism as a leader of state until Hitler
invaded Poland in 1939. We need only
recall Hitler, Mussolini, Chamberlain and
Quisling to know that political leaders
were much worse than Stalin, who stood
as a shining example of a leader of state.
Others talk about Stalin as if communist
leaders were to blame for all humyn evils.
There are many calling themselves
communist in this boat. Most recently,
there is a publication unrelated to us titled
"Internationalist Notes" that just arose in
the imperialist countries. It has a less than
one and a half page platform which uses
the words "not," "no" and "nor" 18 times
in addition to "enemy" and "against"
several times. Yet the platform has not
much to say for the accomplishments of
the movements it does defend.
"Internationalist Notes" upholds the
Russian Revolution from 1917 to 1918,
but otherwise it sees all revolutionary
progress as crushed in the 20th century.
In other words, there is nothing that
"Internationalist Notes" upholds worth
speaking of, only two years of revolution
in one country. These ultra-leftists go on
and on how a few individuals like Lenin
and Stalin crushed all the good progress
happening. They have accepted a
bourgeois idealist view of history in which
a few individuals have that kind of power
to destroy progress instead of realizing
that Lenin, Stalin and Mao are the best
leaders of state the masses produced in
the 20th century. These idealists criticize
reality from the vantage point of an idea
instead of showing realities created by
humyns that were possible and better than
what humyns did do.
The "Internationalist Notes" like many
ultra-leftists and anarchists believe they
are criticizing Lenin, Stalin and Mao in
this fashion. Yet, Stalin and Mao doubled
the life expectancies of their people
despite all their repressions. That is the
concrete reality and it compares favorably
with other realities if not the pre-formed
ideas in the idealists' religiously infected
minds. The Bordigaists, council-
communists and other ultra-leftists cannot
point to anything that they support or that
their political movement has accomplished
in the last century other than criticizing
the most advanced pole that actually
exists. Their method is the same as that
of the Protestant sects: invent an idea that
sounds most attractive and then divide
over it. In contrast, scientific communism
says that we can only put forward that
which has proved possible. We select that
which was most advanced in humyn
history--not from our imaginations or
powers of fantasy.
Countless idealists misunderstand Stalin
and science itself on this point saying that
change requires something "new."
Implicit in their view is that history is not
full of change. That's why something
"new," namely their ideas are necessary
they say. In fact, the idea that new ideas
will lead past a history of non-change is
not new and has existed for thousands of
years. [...]
The difference between a communist
scientist and a dogmatist is that we
scientists work with reality while the non-
Marxist anarchists, ultra-left communists,
Trotskyists etc. simply ASSUME that a
better reality is possible than what Mao,
Stalin etc. brought. Such an assumption
is no different than religion. To be a
scientist, you need to show IN REALITY,
where something was better. The medical
researcher does not say s/he can imagine
a vaccine that would cure a disease and
win the Nobel prize. S/he invents the
vaccine, proves it works and wins the
Nobel Prize. The point is not saying I can
imagine better drugs than we have now!
Such imagination serves its purpose in
poetry and songs, not political analysis.
If the humyn-being were a perfect
animal, do you think it would have taken
thousands of years to put slavery on the
defensive like it is today? Do you think
the United $tates would have required the
bloodiest civil war that it had? The
humyn-being is fucked up and had to have
slavery beaten out of him/her. Such a war
is ALWAYS an authoritarian act--by
The complete version of this
statement, which includes debate with
anarchist critics of MIM, can be found
comments.html See also the FAQ on
What it means to defend Stalin today
We defend Stalin,
because we know
Stalin did not invent
the troubles of our
species in getting to
Continued from page 3...
Today defending
Stalin does not
reflect any
obsession with any
particular detail of
The real meaning of
defending Stalin is
that we are for
socialism, not just
when it drops from
Heaven, not when
the people
simultaneously and
realize the virtues of
socialism and not
only when there is
no repression or
MIM Notes 279 · April 1, 2003 · Page 8
Princeton security
disallows MIM
Princeton, New Jewsey
On March 10th, Princeton University
security stopped MIM Notes distribution.
"Are you students?" the security guard
asked. "This is private property. You
cannot do that here." The guard appeared
within minutes of distribution. Protecting
students against free newspapers is so
important that it was necessary to send a
guard in a car.
Last MIM checked, most of
Amerikkka is private property. If there is
no "free speech" on private property
where thousands of people pass through,
there is no "free speech" in most of
Amerikkka for that reason alone.
Just for additional irony, MIM Notes
distributors were standing outside an old
Princeton building dedicated to an
American "who fought for free speech."
Maybe Princeton ought to read some of
the plaques on the buildings there.
Princeton University received
$146,396,000 from government grants
and contracts in 1999 according to the
Princeton Treasurer's Office reports. Yet
Princeton feels it has the right to stop
certain taxpayers from handing out free
We say "certain taxpayers," because
while Princeton stopped us, we did find
credit card and shopping brochures
available. Apparently American Express
is enrolled at Princeton.
years, see MIM Notes 261). Needless to
say, Chirac's newly found love of true
"free trade" went over well in Africa in
a recent conference, where he admitted
that the West was subsidizing its own food
exports while punishing Africa through
the IMF whenever it tried to do the
Chirac's song about Europe as a power
with equal weight to the united $tates is
an old French idea around since the 1960s.
Hence, the split with Uncle $am at this
moment was a long time coming, if we
take the French idea of why it is happening
As the events with Iraq unfold, the U.$.
dollar has reached a low against the
European currency called the "euro." As
MIM Notes 266 reported previously, Arab
dollars may be a big reason for the
advance of the euro.
Along with the meetings with Africans
and the influx of Arab money, there is
also the matter of the Eastern Europeans.
Chirac pointed out the obvious when he
said that the Eastern European countries
missed a chance to "shut up" when the
united $tates came calling for support for
The Eastern European countries are in
the process of admission to the European
Union. Once accepted, members have the
right to cross borders and use the same
currency, much the way Amerikkkans do
in all states of the united $tates. MIM
shares Chirac's astonishment that
countries from Poland to Bulgaria sided
with the united $tates on Iraq and took
the chance of offending France and
Germany with such economic
enticements right in front of them. The
Eastern European move to side with the
united $tates says one of two very
unflattering things: 1) the Eastern
European bourgeoisie is not bright enough
to perceive who is offering a better
economic deal, the United $tates or
Europe 2) the Eastern Europeans think
that the united $tates is so much more
dynamic than Europe that investment
from thousands of miles away will be
more valuable than being able to cross
borders within the European Union.
Of course, the Eastern European rulers
may secretly think that U.$. military
support through NATO is more important
than joining the European Union! Such
an attitude would stem from an old fear
of Russia on its borders. The Eastern
European countries may also think that
because England and Spain support the
united $tates, they may also do it. In any
case, we can be sure that the alliances
have nothing to do with democracy,
because as in countries other than the
united $tates, England and I$rael, more
than 80% of the population in Eastern
Europe opposes war with Iraq too--which
comes as no surprise to MIM, because
France is serious about multi-polar world,
but French economic ties to U.$. are huge
most countries in the world do not have
crusty labor aristocracies like England and
CBS News reported, "In Bulgaria, a
February poll showed 19 percent
`sympathize with the U.S. and allies.' 10
percent sympathize with Iraq and 55
percent sympathize with neither. 64
percent fear terrorist attacks if Bulgaria
supports the U.S.
"In Latvia, 81 percent were opposed
to military action in Iraq.
"In Hungary, a Gallup poll showed 82
percent oppose military action `under any
circumstance.' In the Czech Republic, 67
percent are against military action.
"Public opinion in Poland is perhaps the
most pro-American. Fifty-two per cent
say Poland should back the U.S.
politically, but 63 percent oppose sending
Polish troops to help."(4)
The Eastern European case is not the
same as the Turkish case, where 94% of
the public opposes war, but the
parliament's plurality still voted for it in
another example why "majority rule" is a
bunch of bullshit in the capitalist world.
Turkey uses the united $tates to push
Turkey into the European Union, as an
advocate so to speak. In contrast, the
Eastern Europeans have pissed off
Chirac and have leaned on the united
$tates to do so. Turkey clamors to get in
to the European Union while the Eastern
Europeans take it for granted.
Aside from the issue of Africans, Turks
and Eastern Europeans--the big unstated
bloc would involve any Arab state truly
wishing to get out from under the u.$.
thumb. If for example Saudi Arabia would
kick out U.$. business in favor of Europe,
the reasons for a trade bloc become at
least somewhat more discernible. It
would still remain a question with the
economic ties amongst the imperialists as
they are whether oil alone is enough
reason to form a bloc and have tariffs go
up between the blocs so that countries
favor other countries in their own bloc
when it comes to trade. We can imagine
that some imperialists might have differing
views on that question and not a fully
scientific outlook on global trade. After
all, it again is a matter of business
competition and whoever grabs the ear
of these politicians such as Chirac and
Bush has already warned France and
Russia that a vote against the Iraq
resolution would cause long-term damage
to diplomatic relations. When we see the
various sides raise tariffs against each
other in a huff, then we will know that
new trade blocs have formed, now that
the old Soviet trade bloc is out of business.
Henry Kissinger (Nixon's Secretary of
State and war criminal) and Tony Blair
(the prime minister of England) have
Continued from page 3...
criticized Europe for going down the road
that appears to open a new global balance
of power game.(5) Meanwhile ex-
president Jimmy Carter's anti-communist
in the cabinet, Zbigniew Brzezinski has
said that the united $tates has never been
so isolated since 1945.(6) That certainly
sounds like trade blocs and tariff
increases are in the offing.
3. The British imperialist mouthpiece
BBC finally admitted the decades-old
practice as well while pointing out that
the imperialists agreed in principle to do
something to cut subsidies to imperialist
country companies while failing to
achieve anything yet. http://
2 0 0 3 / 0 3 / 0 6 / o p i n i o n / m e y e r /
San Francisco protestors: No business as usual March 15.
MIM Notes 279 · April 1, 2003 · Page 9
Congress shut down for the anthrax scare,
this new draft law has been kicking
around for months while Ashcroft's staff
told Congress members that it did not
Patriot Act II alarms us, as the same
people putting it forward are the ones who
failed to prevent 9/11. Many of the powers
that would be granted in Patriot II have
been used in the past and demonstrably
failed to make Amerika any safer. Ben
Franklin pointed out that "those who
would give up liberty for security deserve
neither." And Democratic Party
congresspersyn Jerrold Nadler (NY) has
called Patriot II "little more than the
institution of a police state."(1)
Before 911, Denver police were nailed
for spying on the American Friends
Service Committee, the Nobel Peace
Prize-winning Quaker organization.(2)
And throughout the 1960s and 1970s, the
FBI conducted a war of wiretaps,
infiltration and provocation against
oppressed nation revolutionaries and such
firebrands as Martin Luther King, Jr. and
prevented not one incident of violence
including the Kennedy assassination.
These police actions were illegal when
they took place. Now the Patriot Acts
are doing away with past safeguards --
placing the police and the federal spy
organizations above the courts and beyond
the reach of law.
The new act includes scores of
Block Patriot Act II's march to fascism!
Continued from page 1...
horrifying provisions, taking us back
before the Magna Carta imposed limits
on executive power. As in the first Patriot
Act, many provisions could be used in
regular criminal cases. And more than in
2001, much of the Patriot Act II is aimed
directly at political activists. Among other
things, the "Domestic Security
Enhancement Act" would:
* quash habeas corpus and fair trial
rights by authorizing secret arrests
including those of material witnesses who
are not charged with a crime, denying the
right to sue for information on detainees
under FOIA,(3) and preventing defense
attorneys from challenging use of secret
* end freedoms of association and
assembly and criminalize basic political
activism by stripping American citizenship
from anyone who supports even the
lawful activities of organizations the
administration calls "terrorist," making it
terrorism to engage in potentially
dangerous civil disobedience like that
taken up to stop U.$. bombings in Vieques
(even when the potential danger is only
to the demonstrators themselves), and
making it legal to spy on religious and
other non-criminal groups;
* eliminate privacy by further reducing
the role of courts in overseeing search
and wiretap warrants, creating a DNA
database of American citizens who have
not been convicted of crimes, making
credit reports available to law
enforcement without consent or judicial
review, creating a new category of
"domestic security surveillance" for
terrorism investigations with looser
standards than criminal investigations,
encouraging businesses (like your cable
company and your ISP) to spy on their
customers by immunizing them for any
crimes they commit when they do it, and
requiring bookstores and libraries to turn
over records of their customers' reading
habits upon request by investigators,
without a warrant;
* target immigrants by opening visa files
to local police,(4) providing for extended
jail terms for common immigration
offenses, allowing summary deportation,
and deporting people to any country in
the world, including those with no
functioning government;
* and finally, Patriot Act II would
enhance Amerika's role as an
international police state by permitting
arrests and extraditions of citizens and
non-citizens alike to countries with which
the united snakes has no treaties and
without regard for humyn rights.(2) Had
this last provision been in effect in the
Twentieth Century, Amerika would have
been deporting Armenians to Turkey
during the genocide, Jews to Nazi
Germany, and Blacks to Apartheid South
Amerika cannot make its people safe
because it cannot change its own nature.
Its rapacious brutality has made the united
snakes the sworn enemy of the world's
people, who respond with violence -- the
only response this country understands.
Gutting the first, fourth, fifth, sixth and
eighth amendments will not protect this
country from the wrath of those who
have suffered its assaults. It will only lay
bare the hollowness of Amerika's claim
to democracy and right. The only chance
for safety is getting right with the world's
people through international peace
achieved under communism.
1. Baltimore Sun 21 February, 2003.
SafeandFree.cfm?ID=11817&c=206 Click on
link "For a detailed section-by-section analysis."
3. With this provision, the DOJ proposes to
resolve pending suits by the American Civil
Liberties Union and American-Arab Anti-
Discrimination Committee, et al, for information
on the more than 1,000 people detained since
911. The new Act actually says that defending
itself against the ACLU & ADC suits "requires
extensive Department of Justice resources,
which would be better spent detecting and
[incapacitating] terrorists."("Patriot Act Redux," 21 February, 2003)
4. Police in some cities oppose this measure,
saying that it will make it harder to get
cooperation from immigrant communities. MIM
doesn't give a hoot about the ease of police
work. We point this out to say that as the
reactionaries' state of desperation increases,
they have more trouble keeping their own
interests covered.
Petition: Defend civil liberties
against `anti-terrorist' attack
This petition and more information are available online
With the Domestic Security Enhancement Act, or Patriot
Act II, the Department of Justice (DoJ) proposes to gut the
freedoms of speech and assembly, freedom from unreasonable
search and seizure, and cruel and unusual punishment, and
the rights to due process and speedy and public trial eliminate
checks and balances between the police agencies and the
courts, and do away with the public's right-to-know what its
government is doing.
If enacted, the Patriot Act II would:
* authorize secret arrests including those of material
witnesses who are not charged with a crime;
* bar defense attorneys from challenging use of secret
* deny the right to sue for information on detainees under
the Freedom of Information Act;
* permit arrests and extraditions of citizens and non-citizens
alike to countries with which the U.S. has no extradition treaties
and without regard for those countries' humyn rights records;
* strip American citizenship from anyone who supports even
the lawful activities of organizations the administration calls
* create a new category of "domestic security surveillance"
for terrorism investigations with looser standards than criminal
* provide for extended jail terms for common immigration
offenses; and
* allow summary deportation to any country in the world,
including those with no functioning government.
Patriot Act II would sacrifice basic Constitutional liberties,
and thus be detrimental to the security of the majority of people
living in the United States. We oppose this proposed legislation.
As discussed in an article on page 3, RAIL drafted
this statement in response to the ridiculous
grandstanding of the University of California Police
Campus Police recently released a statement,
distributed to all campus organizations by the Office of
Student Life, requesting organizations ban backpacks
from events and post visible security in response the
recent national "orange alert."
These `security' suggestions are ridiculous and
inconsistent: students are not asked to leave their
backpacks outside of classrooms, yet if a terrorist threat
were real in Santa Barbara, the classroom would be just
as vulnerable as any public event. More so, in fact, given
how many people are packed into some lecture courses.
The truth is the suggestions are not about security, they
are local initiatives by authorities to implement the Bush
administration's national objective of capitalizing on the
fear of the American public in order build support for
and weaken resistance to the military annihilation of
Iraq and the extension of the domestic police state.
The Bush administration's issuance of a heightened
security alert on February 7th is an attempt to further
incite fear in the American public during the Islamic Hajj,
the annual pilgrimage to Mecca. It is one more instance
of the US government representing threats in racial and
ethnic terms, whether it's the war on crime or the war on
terror. This latest incitement of fear linked to the Islamic
Hajj is part of a policy of racial profiling, which scapegoats
and targets people of color as barbarians at the gates of
civilization. If the government was consistent it would
also have issued heightened security alerts on
Christmas and Easter in the wake of the Oklahoma City
bombing in 1995.
While we recognize that we live in a time of insecurity,
we understand the cause of this insecurity to be rooted
in the policies and practices of the United States, its
allies, and proxies around the world. Since the end of
World War II, the US and its allies have overthrown
democratically elected governments, supported and
trained terrorists, assassinated political leaders of whom
they disapproved, and saturated the world with weapons.
Insecurity today is the legacy of this history.
The pattern continues in the present. The incitement of
fear and increased `security' measures will make no one
safer as long as the Bush administration provides overt
and covert military support to repressive regimes in places
like Israel, Saudi Arabia, Columbia, and the Philippines. A
superpower dropping thousands of cruise missiles on a
smaller, less industrialized nation already devastated by
12 years of war and sanctions will not stabilize the Middle
East. Rather, these policies will ensure a future of
continued insecurity and unending violence.
We, the undersigned organizations and individuals of
the UCSB community, declare that we will not comply
with the UCPD's security suggestions for the heightened
terrorist threat of early February 2003, nor will we be
intimidated into complying with any such ordinances in
the future. ... If the University administration is truly
concerned about peace and security, we demand it stop
supporting weapons research on campus, cut its ties with
the "defense" industry, speak out against UC oversight
of the nuclear weapons factories at Los Alamos and
Livermore National Laboratories, and divest from
companies doing business with Israel.
SIGNED: Revolutionary Anti-Imperialist League (SB),
Nikkei Student Union, Green Party-UCSB ASIAN!, Voices
4 Global Justice, HOLA, Muslim Student Association,
Queer Student Union, II9C, El Congreso, Student Action
Forum on the Middle East, Students Stopping Rape, Show
Space at Biko House, Women's Commission, Take Back
the Night
Statement against UC Santa Barbara's "security" policies
MIM Notes 279 · April 1, 2003 · Page 10
MIM on
Prisons & Prisoners
MIM seeks to build public opinion
against Amerika's criminal injustice sys-
tem, and to eventually replace the bour-
geois injustice system with proletarian jus-
tice. The bourgeois injustice system im-
prisons and executes a disproportionately
large and growing number of oppressed
people while letting the biggest mass mur-
derers -- the imperialists and their lack-
eys -- roam free. Imperialism is not op-
posed to murder or theft, it only insists that
these crimes be committed in the interests
of the bourgeoisie.
"All U.S. citizens are criminals--
accomplices and accessories to the crimes
of U.$. oppression globally until the day
U.$. imperialism is overcome. All U.S.
citizens should start from the point of view
that they are reforming criminals."
MIM does not advocate that all
prisoners go free today; we have a
more effective program for fighting
crime as was demonstrated in China
prior to the restoration of capitalism
there in 1976. We say that all prisoners
are political prisoners because under
the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, all
imprisonment is substantively
political. It is our responsibility to
exert revolutionary leadership and
conduct political agitation and
organization among prisoners --
whose material conditions make them
an overwhelmingly revolutionary
group. Some prisoners should and will
work on self-criticism under a future
dictatorship of the proletariat in those
cases in which prisoners really did do
something wrong by proletarian
Under Lock & Key
News from Prisons & Prisoners
NY censorship
There are some things I'd like to bring to
your attention. (1) I've agreed to contribute
my labor, intellect, leadership writings etc...
to the cause. However I don't mind "hustling"
stamps to donate, but in the New York State
prisons system if I mail stamps to an
organization the facility will confiscate them
and I'll get into trouble, and you will be placed
on my negative correspondence list which
means we will not be able to correspond.
Furthermore, every time I write MIM my mail
must be left open for inspection.
--a NY prisoner, February 2003
MIM responds: The treatment described
by this comrade is typical of how prisons
target MIM and other revolutionary groups
in their censorship. The policy on stamps is
something that we have not heard of before
in New York, and seems questionable. If
others have info on the policies or regulations
behind such actions please send them to
GA prisoner is target
of further repression
I have been imprisoned in the Highmax Unit
at Georgia State Prison since July 26, 2001,
and I have seen my fellow prisoners coming
back from recreation, sick call, general
population, routine movements in handcuffs
with swollen eyes, busted skulls and bleeding
profusely from head, nose, etc. All were
jumped by the pigs, both black and white,
male and female, while in handcuffs behind
the back.
Recently, I have received information from
fellow comrades that a pig who holds the rank
of Lieutenant has made threats that he was
gonna hurt me bad and has been waiting on
the right opportunity to have me leave my
cell in handcuffs and be taken in a remote
area of the prisons to be assaulted with gloved
fists, kicked and beaten with sticks.
This Lt. is notorious for cursing, beating
inmates in handcuffs and allowing other
prisoners who are "snitches" to carry out
assaults on prisoners such as myself who file
grievances against these fascist, racist,
coward pigs down here in Tatnall county,
which is a former slave trading post and now
a modern day plantation.
Also, since my arrival at this prison, I have
had to continuously battle with my ink pen
and paper in an attempt to force mailroom
officials to turn over MIM Notes and/or notify
me with proper paperwork of their arrival.
Any prisoner here at G.S.P. who attempts
to file grievances, pass MIM literature around
or show signs of political organizing and
leadership, becomes an immediate target by
administration officials and mail inspectors,
who hold MIM literature for weeks or months
and place all your mail on a "censor list" to
However, I have seen progress albeit slow,
and have been receiving MIM from August,
Sept., etc., and this is because of my
continuous notification of staff members that
MIM cannot be simply rejected because it
talks negatively about prisons or pigs, and
this continuous effort that has forced this
prison to allow MIM literature to slowly enter
Georgia State Prison.
--a Georgia prisoner, December 2002
Connecticut prisoner
encourages legal
Would you please send me a subscription
to MIM Notes? They are so informational
that I still have some that are 12 to 18 months
old. A number of guys are really feelin' them.
The gulags in Connecticut really like finger
fuckin' our mail, particularly if it potentially
inspires us to use their system to acquire
freedom and retribution.
I frequently get mail from the Department
of Justice and its various bureaus and offices.
They refuse to acknowledge mail emanating
from the Department of Justice as legal mail.
This shows how arrogant and ignorant these
piss-heads are. But their types of clear
violations are happening because Connecticut
prisoners (for the most part) appear to have
their backs broken. I'm from New York but I
have been down in Connecticut for 10 years
and this was culture shock to me. I just can't
get used to the passiveness that permeates
the Connecticut prison system. After a full
day of oppression, I've stood at the cell door
steaming, as prisoners bid some of the most
onerous suppressors good night.
However, there are a number of prisoners
whom I've inspired to fight the courtroom
battle. It's catching on. Another brother who
also isn't from this state was transferred to
Nevada because he had gotten a number of
cases flipped for brothers. He is known as
the Conqueror.
I'm doing all I can to free myself, and to
wake these guys up. Furthermore, I implore
all United Snakes prisoners to become
registered users of the National Criminal
Justice Reference Service. It's free. It's a great
resource of all types of information. Ask for a
registration package at:
National Criminal Justice Reference Service
P.O. Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
--a Connecticut prisoner, May 2002
Illegal control unit
status in GA
state prison
For the last three months, Administrative
officials at Georgia State Prison have begun a
new experimental program in SMU units M-1,
M-2, M-3, and M-4 in which prisoners on the
bottom tier have been placed on Sgt or above
status-- they have had steel cages placed
over an already steel and plexiglass window
in which special locks which close off view
and food tray slots have master locks which
can only be opened by a sergeant, lieutenant,
or above and [prisoners] are denied ice, hot
water, etc.
Warden Hugh Smith, Warden of Security,
Fred Brown, and unit manager Steve Dupree
have devised this illegal program, which has
no Department of Corrections (DOC)
Standard Operational Policy (SOP). SOPs are
all policies allocated by state legislature to
the pardon and parole boards, which in turn
oversee GA prisons.
Many prisoners feel powerless because of
their ignorance of the law and the fact that
correctional emergency response teams
(CERT) are allowed to use excessive force
against prisoners in handcuffs. This policy is
used against those who file lawsuits,
grievances, Muslims, natural leaders, etc. I
have attempted to encourage unity amongst
these all Black prisoners, many who are
enemies of one another and lately I myself
have begun to be threatened and harassed
by prison administration, but I will fight to
the end.
-- a Georgia prisoner
Juveniles tried as
adults in Tennessee
On February 26, 2003, news channel 3 in
Memphis, TN reported a new policy
implemented by the Shelby County injustice
system, which states that juveniles 16 or older
who are charged with violent crimes will be
turned over to the adult system for
prosecution. It was also noted that some
juveniles under 16 charged with violent crimes
will be tried as adults in some cases.
Concern for the rehabilitation of juvenile
delinquents seems to have dwindled
dramatically. The juveniles whom this policy
is directed at mainly are those from project
housing, poor quality educational systems,
dysfunctional families, and unemployment.
That is to say that the violent behaviors of
juveniles, which this policy was designed to
attack, are frequently, and in many cases
appropriately, attributed to the overall
conditions of these juveniles environments.
So, if in many cases the environment plays
the key role, then the one's responsible for
allowing such unfit environments to persist
must be burdened with harsher policies to
ensure that violent juveniles are no longer
breed by their immediate surroundings. These
environments are created by capitalism, a
system that punishes youth for being born
into poverty rather than offering equal
opportunities for all. It is the capitalists who
should be held responsible for this system.
Once the systematic deficiencies of youth
development are attacked, sufficiently
corrected, and no longer serve as a `cause'
for juvenile delinquency, then and only then
should such harsh policies (as charging
juveniles with violent crimes as adults) be
Since juveniles in Shelby county charged
with violent crimes are now being prosecuted
and punished as adults, why not just reduce
the age of legal adulthood to 16 instead of 18
or 21? The insinuation of this new policy
appears to be that there is no hope for the
rehabilitation of juveniles charged with violent
crimes, regardless of it they are first time
offenders or not. Further, Memphis and
Shelby counties are only inches away from
imposing death penalties on its youth, which
according to this new policy, makes juveniles
eligible for capital punishment.
With such un-thought-out, cruel, unjust
measures being taken, the injustice system
and its advocates on this issue expose
themselves as the true hypocritical beasts/
oppressors/tyrants that they really are. If
concern for the rehabilitation of "juvenile
delinquents," as is the name adopted by the
courts for youths who commit crimes, has
been lost, then the so called concern for the
rehabilitation of adult convicts is a farce.
Even as this policy is being implemented,
there still remain the millions of tax dollars
furnished for the sole purpose of rehabilitating
the youth.
-- a prisoner in Tennessee, March 2003
MIM Notes 279 · April 1, 2003 · Page 11
Facts on U$ imprisonment
The facts about imprisonment in the United $tates are that the United $tates has been the world's leading prison-state per capita for the last
25 years, with a brief exception during Boris Yeltsin's declaration of a state of emergency.(1)
That means that while Reagan was talking about a Soviet "evil empire" he was the head of a state that imprisoned more people per capita.
In supposedly "hard-line" Bulgaria of the Soviet bloc of the 1980s, the imprisonment rate was less than half that of the United $tates.(2,3)
To find a comparison with U.$. imprisonment of Black people, there is no statistic in any country that compares including apartheid South
Africa of the era before Mandela was president. The last situation remotely comparable to the situation today was under Stalin during war
time. The majority of prisoners are non-violent offenders(4) and the U.S. Government now holds about a half million more prisoners than
China; even though China is four times our population.(5)
The rednecks tell MIM that we live in a "free country." They live in an Orwellian 1984 situation where freedom is imprisonment.
Notes: 1. Marc Mauer, "Americans Behind Bars: The International Use of Incarceration 1993," The Prison Sentencing Project, 918 F. St. NW, Suite
501, Washington, DC 20004 (202) 628-0871 Reference: SRI: R8965-2, 1994
2. Ibid., 1992 report.
3. United Nations Development Programme, "Human Development Report 1994,:" Oxford University Press, p. 186.
4. Figure of 51.2 percent for state prisoners there for non-violent offenses. Abstract of the United States 1993, p. 211.
5. Atlantic Monthly December, 1998.
From the MIM "Frequently Asked
Questions" page,
Internationalism is the ethical belief or
scientific approach in which peoples of
different nations are held to be or assumed to
be equal. Internationalism is opposed to
racism and national chauvinism.
We Maoists believe the nationalism of
nations experiencing oppression of
imperialism is "applied internationalism." We
oppose nationalism of oppressed nations
directed at other oppressed nations, because
the economic content of such nationalism is
intra-proletarian conflict. We seek a united
front of oppressed nations led by the
international proletariat against imperialism.
"I must argue, not from the point of view
of `my' country (for that is the argument of a
wretched, stupid, petty-bourgeois nationalist
who does not realize that he is only a plaything
in the hands of the imperialist bourgeoisie),
but from the point of view of my share in the
preparation, in the propaganda, and in the
acceleration of the world proletarian
revolution. That is what internationalism
means, and that is the duty of the
internationalist, of the revolutionary worker,
of the genuine Socialist."
V. I. Lenin, "What Is Internationalism?"
The Proletarian Revolution and the
Renegade Kautsky
(Peking: Foreign
Language Press, 1965), p. 80.
What is internationalism?
Setting up gang fights
I got a hold of one of the MIM Notes and
am impressed with your frankness and
realness about the going ons about us. After
reading #272, Dec 15, 2002 issue, some articles
about prisons, I'd like to share some
experiences I've had while here at this
Corcoran facility with you.
I am currently in Administrative
Segregation. On March 2, 2002 a riot broke
out on A facility between two Latino groups
(Southern Mexicans and Bulldogs) where 3
inmates were sliced and one was stabbed. A
30 day lock down was put into effect, but no
interviews were conducted of inmates from
these two groups. When an incident of this
nature happened before with two groups
(Nortenos and Bulldogs) the smaller of the
two groups was moved to another yard and
the institution has kept these two groups
apart. As should be done legally. This time
the groups were not separated, no parley was
attempted, and no placement of any inmates
in ad seg pending transfer.
After the 30 days, on 4-3-02 both groups
were let out. Partial Bulldogs from "one"
building and all Southern Hispanics from
"one" building. Another riot took place. The
administration had all extra staff there in riot
gear, face shields, extra flex (plastic) handcuffs,
elbow pads, staff from all general population,
ad. seg staff, escorting staff, ISU (Institutional
Services Unit) MTAs (Medical Technical
Assistant). In front of the A-Facility office
the personnel who hold classification were
there, correctional counselors, Lt. Diaz, they
were just grouped up, waiting , watching, for
something to happen. All they needed were
lawn chairs and some popcorn. A video
camera was manned by a CO on top of the
gym which recorded the riot.
All of this was and is illegal for
administration to set this type of incident up
and let it go down, with full knowledge, being
aware that a substantial risk of serious harm
was present to the inmates from each other.
I was given a SHU term of 4 months for
"Participation in a riot" which was completed
back in June of 2002 but I am still being
retained in Ad. Seg. The first Rule Violation
Report (RVR) 115 was reheard because I was
not allowed to view the video. The second
same 115 is being reissued reheard because
of another due process violation. When I went
to have the second 115 heard I was not given
my copy of the Investigative Employee report
which is supposed to be given 24 hours prior
to the hearing. At the hearing I let the hearing
officer Lt. Miller know this that I did not want
the 115 heard yet until I could review the
document but Lt. Miller didn't care and found
me guilty anyway, another due process
Here I sit in ad seg 10 months waiting to be
issued an RVR 115 and have it heard. When
normally this process takes 30 days. I have
602 appealed the write up, I have stated case
law in it. Administrators can not just let
violence take its course and then have a front
row seat and watch. No that's not legal. I have
also appealed the due process violations.
This place is so corrupt I wish others would
let it be known about conditions in the
prisons they're in.
-- a prisoner in California, CSP Corcoran,
February 2003
SHU rights violations
I am in the Security Housing Unit (SHU)
here at CCI Tehachapi. The administration
here has no regard at all for the Title 15 or
prisoner rights, and one of the main problems
is Sacramento seems to support them all day
long. You have prisoners complain about
violations but try to get them to do more than
complain is near impossible. I have been
reaching out to try to organize some form of
collective resistance to no avail. A lot of lip
service is the closest I can get to some
support. I have been branded as a problem
inmate because I dare to speak out against
these violations. I commonly hear "why are
you the only person complaining."
I propose first that all violations be
documented, and written up state wide then
a system wide suit pressed against the
director for allowing the individual
institutions to operate outside of the code of
regulations. Individual lawsuits are useless,
what's justice for one or two, we want a system
wide overhaul. Second, a mass education
campaign. So many of us prisoners are not
conscious of the abuses focusing our energy
on yard politics. Which amounts to nothing.
This does not take a large group, just a few
willing to sacrifice time and maybe a few
-- a prisoner in California, CCI Tehachapi,
February 2003
MIM responds: We do have a state-wide
campaign on to both document and fight the
abuses both inside the SHU and elsewhere in
California prisons. We join this prisoner's call
to get all violations documented and written
up for MIM Notes. We will also say that there
are many prisoners willing to stand up and
do something more than just complain. We
are in touch with hundreds of them across
the state of California and United Struggle
from Within, the MIM-led organization for
prisoners, has been gaining new leaders by
the day in this state. USW has initiated a state-
wide study group on the MIM Theory journal
"Amerikan Prisons on Trial" to further study
and discuss our strategy for the battle in
California and across the entire Amerikan
Criminal Injustice System. Contact us to get
Three strikes: the
fight continues
It should surprise no one that the United
$tates Supreme Court upheld the
constitutionality of sending shoplifters to
prison for life.
I am one of over 4,000 nonviolent inmates
sentenced under the heavy-hand of
California's three strikes sentencing law. All
across the state, for those of us similarly
situated, our families and supporters had
hoped for a favorable ruling in Lockyer v.
Andrade and Ewing v. California.
On March 5, 2003, a sharply divided
Supreme Court held in a 5 to 4 decision that
sending petty theft offenders to prison for
life did not violate the 8th Amendment's ban
against cruel and unusual punishment.
A nonviolent third strike covers a lot of
ground. In California, a three strikes sentence
can be given for "any" felony if one has two
or more serious or violent priors. It does not
matter how long ago these convictions
occurred, or how minor the instant offense.
Of the 26 states and the federal governments
how have a form of three strikes on their
books, California stands alone in the "any"
felony distinction.
Regardless of what the proponents of three
strikes profess, it should not take a Supreme
Court debate to illustrate the fundamental
unfairness of giving someone a life sentence
for a crime which usually carries a sentence
of a couple of years. But apparently it does.
And obviously the nation's highest court will
continue to give states strong deference to
do as they please in criminal justice matters,
no matter how outrageous or extreme the
A democratic society cannot support both
huge prison systems and successful school
districts. They are unable to coexist
harmoniously. It is simply not feasible. One
feeds off the other. Building and maintaining
a vast prison system means school districts
will have to suffer.
Dollars earmarked for criminal justice,
weather they be for law enforcement or
corrections, should never be used to
vigorously police and systematically
incarcerate as a macro and constant ideology.
Obviously, those who victimize deserve to
be punished. But education is the key, not
mindlessly subscribing to endless domestic
wars against one's own people. Bankrupting
the future in a futile attempt to sanitize the
present has not made the streets safer. On
the contrary, Amerika leads the world in both
deviance and rates of incarceration.
Since Californians are the ones responsible
for overwhelmingly approving three strikes
in 1994, they should be the ones to fix it --
not the Supreme Court. Three strikes is purely
a California problem, created by California's
drug war mongers and prison industrialists.
A 2004 ballot initiative is in the works to
amend three strikes to apply to only serious
crimes. The goal is not to set free predators
and violent criminals, but to close an ugly
chapter of California history that had both
shoplifters and drug addicts receiving life
sentences alongside murders and rapists.
For those of us struck out for non-serious
transgressions, we are our only victims. While
those who continue to dogmatically cling to
the criminal justice status quo are the real
perpetrators -- supporting injustice, no
matter what the cost.
-- a California prisoner, March 2003
MIM adds: We join the fight for changes
to the California Three Strike law while we
maintain our position that it must be
eliminated entirely. Laws that increase the
imprisonment rate in Amerika are not making
the streets safer, instead they are just helping
with the targeting of oppressed nations while
the real mass murderers, the imperialists,
remain in power.
California Prisons: Repression and Resistance
MIM Notes 279 · April 1, 2003 · Page 12
Notas Rojas
avril 1, 2003, Nº 279 Fragmento del Periodico Oficial del Movimiento Internacionalista Maoista
¿Que es el MIM?
El Movimiento Internacionalista Maoísta (MIM) es un partido revolucionario
comunista que ejerce el Marxismo-Leninismo-Maoísmo. El MIM es una organización
internacionalista que trabaja desde el punto de vista del proletariado del Tercer Mundo;
es por esto que sus miembros no son amerikanos sino ciudadanos del mundo.
El MIM lucha para acabar con la opresión de todos los grupos sobre cualquier otro,
naciones por naciones, clases por clases, y géneros por géneros. La revolución es una
realidad para los Estados Unidos mientras su ejército continúa extendiendose en su
esfuerzo por asegurar la hegemonía mundial.
El MIM difiere de otros partidos en tres puntos basicos: (1) El MIM sostiene que
después que el proletariado conquiste el poder estatal, existira aún el potencial para una
restauración de tipo capitalista, bajo la dirección de una burguesía nueva dentro del
mismo partido comunista. En el caso de la Unión Soviética, la burguesía se apoderó del
gobierno después de la muerte de Stalin, en 1953; y en China después de la muerte de
Mao y del derrocamiento de la llamada "banda de los cuatro' en 1976. (2) El MIM
sostiene que la Revolución Cultural en China es la fase ms avanzada a la que llegó el
comunismo en la historia. (3) El MIM afirma que la clase trabajadora blanca de los
EE.UU. es primordialmente, una élite trabajadora no revolucionaria en el presente. Es
por esto que no es el principal vehículo para avanzar el Maoísmo en este país.
El MIM acepta como miembro a cualquier individuo que esté de acuerdo con estos
tres puntos basicos, y que acepte al centralismo democrtico, el método de gobierno por
la mayoría en lo que se refiere a cuestiones de línea del partido. El MIM es un partido
clandestino que no publica los nombres de sus miembros para evitar la represión estatal
dirigida históricamente contra los movimientos revolucionarios comunistas, y anti-
imperialistas. Si Ud. desea una suscripción para cualquiera de nuestros periódicos o
libros teóricos, en español o en inglés, por favor mandar dinero en efectivo o un cheque
al nombre de MIM a esta dirección:
MIM · P.O. Box 29670 · Los Angeles CA 90029-0670
4 de diciembre, 2002
Traducido por Células de Estudio
para la Liberación de Aztlán y
América Latina
Los coreanos del sur continúan
protestando contra la absolución de dos
soldados americanos que habían
aplastado a dos estudiantes coreanas
con su vehículo militar en junio (1) a pesar
de las disculpas tardías de Bush. Entre
los manifestantes que han participado en
las protestas están unos jóvenes
militantes que lanzaron unos recipientes
de cocktail Mólotov contra una
instalación militar yanqui la semana
pasada, y unos grupos religiosos que
marcharon ayer en Seúl. (2)
Aunque no todos los manifestantes
reunidos en torno a este incidente trágico
más reciente creen que las 35,000 tropas
americanas que se encuentran en el
terreno coreano deberían marcharse- un
dueño de un restaurante tomo la decisión
de no poner en la ventana un póster
diciendo "!Yanquis, váyanse a su casa!"
porque el mensaje era "demasiado
fuerte" y, en cambio, puso un póster
diciendo "Los americanos no están
bienvenidos aquí" (3)- más y más gente
está viendo esta conexión. Un sacerdote
anglicano entrevistado durante la
protesta de ayer dijo: "En vez de ser
asesinado por un vehículo militar
estadounidense, preferiría morir por
mano de nuestra propia gente en la
Corea del Norte si es que hay guerra".
Como mencionamos en la última
edición de MIM Notes, la opinión
pública en la Corea del Sur se está
volviendo en contra de EE.UU.; hasta
bandas de música pop coreanas sacan
videos antiamericanos. Tan sólo un
tercio de los coreanos del sur
entrevistados recientemente tenían una
opinión favorable de EE.UU.
compradando con casi dos tercios, en
1994. Más de 50% de la gente piensa
que Bush está metiendo en líos a la
Corea del Norte con el fin de vender
aviones de caza al régimen títere de la
Corea del Sur. (4)
Los norteamericanos deberían hacer
mucho caso de lo que están diciendo
sus ex-amigos en la Corea del Sur. No
debería haber ninguna razón para que
los coreanos sospechen una intervención
con fines lucrativos en sus asuntos por
parte de Bush, aunque lo más probable
es que sus sospechas tengan razón. Es
bastante difícil llevarse bien tal como
están las cosas. Los norteamericanos
tienen que afrontar a sus líderes
probélicos; hasta entonces no tienen
porque quejarse de los dueños de
restaurantes que les impiden disfrutar su
barbacoa favorita en Seúl.
De hecho, los norteamericanos corren
suerte si lo único que tienen que enfrentar
son insultos en la calle o un boicoteo en
un restaurante. Este año unos soldados
norteamericanos fuera de guardia se
enfrentaron con unos coreanos del sur
que se encontraban camino a una
protesta en contra del asesinato de las
estudiantes. Aunque los testimonios de
lo que pasó varían- según los coreanos,
los soldados se burlaron de sus volantes
y atacaron a un señor viejo que acabó
en el hospital- lo importante es que los
manifestantes forzaron a uno de los
soldados a atender la manifestación y
leer una declaración pidiendo disculpas
por la muerte de las niñas y el ataque
contra los manifestantes.
Por un lado, es probable que aquel
soldado en particular no tenía nada que
ver con la muerte de las niñas y no había
sido más que un "testigo inocente". Por
otro lado, todo el personal militar había
sido mandado a Corea como un ejército
ocupante lo cual lo convierte en un obvio
blanco del resentimiento por parte del
pueblo coreano. El MIM responde a los
militares estadounidenses que se sienten
atrapados: "pues sí, están Uds.
atrapados". Los imperialistas se pueden
dar el lujo de permitir que unas cuantas
personas sufran las consecuencias de sus
sistema. Aquellos militares que
Se intensifican las protestas del pueblo
coreano contra las tropas estadounidenses
reconocen que son parte de un sistema
bélico deberían intentar dejar de serla
por medio de oponerse a algunas de (o
todas) las responsabilidades.
Definitivamente no deben permitir que
su rabia afecte a los coreanos.
El MIM no se opone al intento de los
manifestantes coreanos del sur de
organizar campañas educativas
esporádicas. Teóricamente, estaban
haciendo lo mismo que hizo el gobierno
revolucionario de China al encarcelar a
Allyn y Adelle Rickett por su actividad
de espionaje justo antes de la Guerra
Coreana. Según lo describen los Rickett
en su libro Priosioneros de la Liberación,
su encarcelamiento y autocrítica forzada
les obligó a deshacerse de sus
presunciones chovinistas sobre la
superioridad de las vidas
norteamericanas e intereses personales
frente a las de los coreanos o chinos.
Fuentes consultadas:
1. MIM Notes 261, 1 julio 2002;
MIM Notes 262, 15 julio 2002.
2. Video AP, 3 diciembre 2002.
3. Los Angeles Times, 27 Nov 2002.
4. MIM Notes 272, 15 diciembre
El militarism amerikano trae muerte y la destrucción a la gente del mundo.