MIM(Prisons) is a cell of revolutionaries serving the oppressed masses inside U.$. prisons, guided by the communist ideology of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.
Under Lock & Key is a news service written by and for prisoners with a focus on what is going on behind bars throughout the United States. Under Lock & Key is available to U.S. prisoners for free through MIM(Prisons)'s Free Political Literature to Prisoners Program, by writing:
MIM(Prisons) PO Box 40799 San Francisco, CA 94140.
July 2018 – Hey guys n gals. Well good and bad news.
First the good. I successfully organized my first demonstration, on
Father’s Day. We are in G-4 custody (20 hr lockdown - 2 hr dayroom and 2
hr rec). The staff always steals our rec with the excuse of “short of
staff.” So I gathered 6 other prisoners and stated that we would like to
speak to Rank (i.e. Sergeant or Lieutenant). Soon all 48 prisoners were
united. The officers did not know what to do. They called on the radio
an ICS (inmate control squad) stating that we were refusing to rack up.
Lo and behold, every officer on the unit arrived with bean bag guns,
gas, Sergeants, Lieutenants, Captains, everybody. I guess they were NOT
short of staff! LOL!
After that I approached the Captain very calmly and told him our
grievances. The Warden showed up just in time to see. He said “tell them
to rack up and we will see what the officer has to say.” Seeing that the
message had been delivered, I withdrew.
About 10 minutes later they came back and gave us rec.
Now the bad news. Since then the prisons are now targeting me and I am
in Seg. SMH! It is okay. Because I see now that I do have the power to
make a difference.
Thanks for the Texas Activist Pack, and thanks for the back issues. I
also got ULK 62 yesterday and I will follow up soon. In Struggle!
MIM(Prisons) responds: The Texas Activist Pack was updated in
August 2018, and you can get one by sending a donation of $3.50. It’s a
bit thicker now, so the cost to print and mail it has gone up since the
last version. The Texas Pack has info about all the campaigns that
United Struggle from Within comrades have developed for the state of
Texas.
Let’s pause to consider why aren’t these materals already available to
prisoners held by TDCJ? Why has the TDCJ been withholding the grievance
manual from prisoners since at least November 2014? Who are the people
held by TDCJ and how does it impact their lives and familes when they
don’t have access to this info?
Filing grievances and working on individual or reform campaigns do have
their place. But, like with this comrade’s successful efforts to get rec
time, the greatest impact will come in the unity we build with our
comrades, and the sense of our own power that we can tap into. Those are
the successes that are going to stick with us for the long haul, and
through various stages that our struggle goes through.
May 2018 – I read ULK 61 and it is a pretty interesting
newsletter on a topic that I have never put much thought into. I have to
say I do not agree with the portion about “un-muddling the relationships
between comrades (i.e. no dating within the org)” in the
Sex-Offenders
vs. Anti-People Sex Crimes article. I believe this practice would
serve no real interest in the organization. I believe it is a form of
dis-unity. To make a method of such effective the org would have to
segregate the two (men and women). The reason being men and women form
relationships naturally. I believe we need to congregate with our women
for relationships, build unity, and if unity is a strong point of this
organization a rule like that shall be established in this organization.
I do understand why MIM would decide to take that approach, but I see it
as going against the inevitable. I believe it would also create secrecy
in the org if people were dating and that would cause dishonesty. I
believe a better approach would be to recognize the relationship, as to
say if the comrades are to date they should be married. Not only would
this relationship be recognized by the org, it would be recognized by
the state/U.$., further decreasing such allegations of sex crimes. And
at the same time the organization would be helping to build and create
unity between men and women.
Another reason I believe this approach/practice would be more effective
in the organization is because people seem to be more serious about
marriage, meaning there just won’t be any fraternizing within the
organization. If there has to be an appointed licensed priest/preacher
or someone to wed the two it should be done so. It, the ceremony, should
be done in front of the org. Now it becomes if someone interferes with
the relationship man or woman they should be punished/dealt with. Now
that the marriage is consensual the sex is consensual. We should not
deharmonize the harmony between man and woman. We are trying to build a
United Front!
MIM(Prisons) responds: We need to be clear that marriage does not
ensure consensual sex. We can’t create a utopia outside of the
patriarchal culture right now, and so we know that our relationships
(including marriages) will still be strongly influenced by that culture.
And under the patriarchy sexual relations are inherently unequal
regardless of marital status or level of political activism of the
people involved.
This writer is correct that people do have a tendency to become
romantically involved with people with whom they spend a lot of time.
And having a lot of political unity can encourage this romance. We don’t
share the view that this is naturally just between men and wimmin. It
also happens between men and men and between wimmin and wimmin. So
separating the people would only stop some romance. There may be other
arguments for separating men and wimmin while we battle the patriarchy,
but we shouldn’t expect this to end romance or sexual assault. The
situation in men’s prisons across the United $tates is a clear
demonstration of this point.
Our main disagreement with this writer is with the idea that we should
use romance to build unity. On the factual front, even with the
formality of marriage, most relationships don’t stay together. This is
just a fact of life under the imperialist patriarchy right now. This is
the reality we live in. And we know that when relationships end there is
a lot of irrational anger (and often rational anger too) that comes with
it. So if we’re trying to build unity, encouraging romantic
relationships is likely to backfire in the majority of cases where the
relationship doesn’t last. Perhaps we can do better than the average
couple with the support of the political organization, but we’re still
going to have a lot of relationships end. We just don’t have the power
or reach right now to reverse this fact of patriarchal culture.
In the ULK 61 article this writer responds to we wrote:
“How we handle this process now in our cell structure will be different
if a cell has 2 members versus 2,000 members. The process will need to
be adapted for different stages of the struggle as well, such as when we
have dual power, and then again when the Joint Dictatorship of the
Proletariat of the Oppressed Nations has power. And on and on, adapting
our methods into a stateless communism.
”Even with policies in
place, we have limited means of combating chauvinism, assault
allegations and other unforeseen organizational problems endemic to the
left. Rather than wave off these contradictions, or put them out of
sight (or cover them up, like so many First World-based parties and
organizations have done), we need to build institutions that protect
those who are oppressed by gender violence.”
This is something we need to continue discussing, trying various
approaches, and working on the best approaches to ensure the longevity
of the anti-imperialist movement.
“We stand for active ideological struggle because it is the weapon for
ensuring unity within the Party and the revolutionary organizations in
the interest of our fight. Every communist and revolutionary should take
up this weapon.” – Comrade Mao, “Combat Liberalism”
Within every class, gender, and nation, trans women are being oppressed
and persecuted because of their trans disposition. This has been so
within both capitalist and socialist societies, among revolutionaries as
among reactionaries.
Many hallmark social/revolutionary movements in America’s history had
non-supportive regard for trans people. The consciousness was not there
yet; revolutionary consciousness evolves by degrees, through years,
decades, the same for such movements (and governments) in other
countries.
In century 21, both political and revolutionary consciousness are at a
much higher frequency. Trans political resistance is occurring across
the country (and the world); trans people have become cognizant of the
political aspects of their quality of life existence, and are getting
politically involved in a revolutionary manner.
The political and revolutionary consciousness evolution of trans people
is taking place in America’s prisons. In California, the 36 Movement of
trans women is politically active against the anti-trans oppression,
persecution, and genocide of the prison system for their lives,
livelihood and for political power. There is also the right-wing
reaction they must contend with on the yards, and, as well, reactionary
behavior towards them by left revolutionaries, and by presumed
progressive media outlets on the left. People do not become progressive
or revolutionary overnight. Anti-trans sentiment is deep among those so
afflicted, because putrid bourgeois opinion predominates in American
society, and is infectious.
How are the cadre to address such reactionary or quasi-reactionary
tendencies within the revolutionary camp? For one, internal
indoctrination can put light on the subject, so that new cadre are
aware. But so must elder cadre become aware. For another, ideological
discussion on trans issues are worthwhile – trans within society/prison,
within the revolutionary ranks – discerning among each other and within
oneself traces of reactionary inclination and weeding them out, aligning
personal in line with revolutionary principles that guide attitudes
towards the people, and propagating the new awareness.
By such ideological debate, properly practiced, broader unity will
result. This is revolutionary. This is the revolutionary guidance of Mao
Thought.
Across the wider spectrum, included is regard for lesbians, gays,
bisexuals, and gender nonconforming people.
MIM(Prisons) responds: The transgender question has come out of
the closet in recent years. This is a necessary step towards ending
gender-based oppression. The question is what bringing the issue to
light under capitalist patriarchy will achieve.
We can look back at the gay/lesbian/queer struggles in this country and
see how they led to integration of those once separate communities into
mainstream Amerika. While white wimmin have always been allies to white
men in national oppression, this relationship has only solidified with
increasing power of wimmin in Amerikan society. Both of these examples
inform our understanding of nation as principal to our struggle against
all oppression.
If we look at nation, we also see integrationism though. Today the
integration road is presented as a viable option in the United $tates,
rather than something you have to fight for. However, with nation, that
integration was not complete. The ghettos became more isolated, even
though they have since become more dispersed, and the koncentration
kamps of course expanded with oppressed nations filling the cages. With
the integration of both the relatively gender and nationally oppressed
in this country, we did not see improvements for wimmin or oppressed
nations overall in the world. So there is a problem with looking just at
U.$. society for measuring progress.
The fact that transgender issues have not been a public discussion for
as long as other forms of oppression does create the sense that
transgender people are the most oppressed, and need the most attention.
And this is the conclusion by many advocates of identity politics. As
this comrade says, they have faced oppression in all parts of society.
However, with our understanding of society within the framework of
dialectical materialism we can talk about why nation is principal under
imperialism, look at the historical examples of gender struggles in this
country, and predict that the transgender struggle is not going to move
us toward ending oppression the fastest.
None of that discounts what the comrade says about struggling for the
inclusion and acceptance of transgender prisoners, and people in
general, in the revolutionary movement. In some ways the prison
population was ahead of the curve on this one as the prominence of
transgender wimmin in male prisons has made this issue part of daily
life for prisoners before many Amerikans began grappling with it. Still,
this has not led to an overall overall progressive attitude among male
prisoners, in part due to the hyper masculinity that the prison
environment engenders.
This is an example of how communists must try to address all issues
holding back the revolution, while focusing on the principal
contradiction. We join this comrade in calling for ideological
discussions around trans issues in mass work. This will foster greater
unity within the oppressed nations and among the revolutionary movement
of prisoners overall.
I think a crime against the people is dead ass wrong because they be
bringing up all kind of bullshit ass charges to hold you for shit just
because you have a certain kind of charge. People will judge you. It’s
hard for a sex offender charge because the female officers will use your
sex charge against you. They act like you done killed the president or
something.
I done seen some cats get locked up for 1 charge, come out of prison a
sex offender. Like in the state I’m locked up in, Georgia. They will
make you register as a sex offender if you have masturbation charge on
your file or too many of them.
A lot of drug charges get more time than anything. But it’s the hardest,
say like this, if I sell drugs to support my family because I can’t get
a job. That’s the only thing I know how to do. Not to say it’s right.
But I done seen how drugs fucked some people up, like ice. It done
messed up a lot of black people. How can the pigs punish you for drugs?
But you are not trying to stop it. It’s doing nothing but killing our
own people.
MIM(Prisons) responds: This writer underscores why we want to set
up systems of rehabilitation for people who commit crimes against the
people. We agree that it is hypocritical for a society to punish people
for selling drugs, but set it up so this is the easiest (or only) way
people can feed their families.
Capitalist society promotes crimes against the people: from careers in
national oppression (police, CO, military, government), to flooding
lumpen neighborhoods with drugs and guns, to advertising sex (often with
very young girls) in popular culture. We need to transform these
oppressive structures and culture of rape so that we can hold people to
realistic standards of treating their fellow humyns with dignity and
respect.
That’s not to excuse the cops and military for what they do every day to
oppressed nations. And we can push the lumpen now to stop pushing
destructive drugs on their people. Even under capitalism people have the
ability to act in the interests of the oppressed. But we know that the
biggest step we can take towards ending the oppression is ending the
structure of capitalism that requires this oppression.
Having been engaged much of my adult life in fedz and now state of
Oregon, I am acutely aware of this dilemma which faces us behind the
walls. As a “validated” (e.g. oppressor-classified prison gang member)
New Afrikan for over 20 years, I’ve been conditioned to see myself as a
kind of superior klass of man within the greater kaptive klass. By
virtue of my “good” paperwork I established a history of violence behind
walls: day-to-day conduct in line with NARN ideological precept(s). I
saw it as us vs. them, the latter being those who had “bad” paperwork
(e.g. sex charges, informant backgrounds, etc.). We were taught to
revile them, extort them, dog them at every turn, as if doing so would
somehow validate my/our realness. A “convict” vs. “inmates”! For over
half my life I’ve bought into this fallacy.
In 2014 I had a life-altering experience. First I was given 45 years
behind a PTSD-fueled assault. Secondly, I was abandoned by all I’d held
dear. Thirdly, I embraced Islam. All of which caused me to do a
self-evaluation and in turn analyze my ideology as it related to
“struggle”. Entering the ODOC, I’ve found that all my previously-held
notions of what is and what is not a so-called “convict” has been
forever altered. This cesspool is a virtual twilight zone to say the
least. The ODOC captives have created a Calif-caricature, in which
alternative realities to reality is the prevailing social norm. The
so-called “good dudes” are those with no sex offenses, yet can be
obvious jailhouse rodents and be respected. This wierdo worldview made
me reevaluate.
Those of us who subscribe to progressive politics see it like this.
Simply having a sex case does not, in and of itself, make one a pariah
to us. We believe in a peoples’ tribunal, where one’s peers study all
paperwork related to a case prior to making any community decisions. It
should be noted: child rape and elderly rape is non-negotiable, if DNA
evidence is involved. We all hold those to be a line of demarcation and
that peoples’ justice should be meted out accordingly.
Now with this being said, a Muslim is obligated to not only accept all
fellow Muslims as brothers in faith but also support him in conflicts
that occur. I cannot lie, my prior conditioning has me today struggling
with this. My hatred for the Amerikan injustice system makes it
virtually impossible to be cool with those who’ve rided for the kkkops.
Ditto for those who see putting molestation of children or elders as ok.
Islam teaches us that our creator accepts repentance of all who
sincerely repent and in turn correct their behaviors. As a man, a dad, a
granddad, I am wrestling mightily within myself to embrace this tenet of
my faith, whilst simultaneously striving to embrace my kaptive peers
into a more unified and progressive ideological precept.
In a nutshell, ODOC is showing us that many sex convictions are highly
suspect and as such must be independently verified, prior to judging
them. And, there can be redemption and klass acceptance for some. The
divisions within klass truly only serve the oppressors’ interests, as
they continue to oppress us all. History has shown the poorest of
Euroamerikans have been and continue to be the greatest obstacles to
klass unity, as they fear unity and klass progress will cost them their
“white privilege.” Hence their continuous “chads agent” behaviors
anytime we make any advances. This segment is our greatest enemy in my
eyes and until we address them, in context of “dangerous foes,” we shall
not progress.
With that I shall stop here. Hopefully, something i’ve shared can help
push this national dialogue. Until the next time, I remain standing firm
and firmly embracing of all progressives! Power to the people.
MIM(Prisons) responds: We appreciate this writer’s work to build
unity and embrace those ey previously rejected. But we want to comment
on the klass division ey mentions. As this writer explains,
Euro-Amerikans’ fear of losing their class privilege is a huge barrier
to unity in the United $tates. This fact reinforces our understanding
that it is nation, not class, that is the principal contradiction within
U.$. borders. Oppressed-nation unity is what we must fight for, because
the vast majority of the oppressor nation will not join the struggle to
end their power and privilege. There’s still a place in the struggle for
white folks who renounce their national privilege and join the
revolutionary movement. We can embrace whites, men, sex offenders, drug
dealers, and all who renounce past reactionary acts and dedicate
themselves to serving the people.
I read ULK 61 and it gave me the idea to finally speak up. I
spoke with my loved ones on me sharing a bit about my current situation,
and they agreed it was a great idea to share my conflicting story.
I was arrested in 2013 at the age of 16 for a sex crime on a minor under
the age of 14. The victim was a relative who was very close to me. Being
sexually abused myself at such a young age, I know how my victim might
feel. The difference in my abuse was I was 9 years old when a
43-year-old man took advantage of me in the worst forms possible. I
started to use heavy drugs at the age of 11. I smoked meth and PCP, and
did mostly any drug that I could get my hands on. I was under the
influence when I committed the crime. Even though I only remember small
pieces of that day, I had to be honest with myself and my loved ones. I
was sentenced to 5 years in prison for what I did.
Now that my victim is older she has forgiven me for what I did. My mom
and other family members stood by my side. They knew I needed help. The
drugs were taking over my life.
Being so young in prison really shattered my innocence and what little
of humanity that I had within me. My transition from juvenile hall to
state prison was terrifying. I was afraid that I wasn’t going to make it
home. I was beaten, humiliated by COs, sexually assaulted by my cellies.
I had lost hope. I didn’t want to accept that I was being categorized as
a sex-offender or a cho-mo, even though I was a youngster when I
committed the crime. I attempted suicide at least 7 times while in
prison. I tried to hang myself, I cut my veins, and overdosed several
times. I couldn’t come to terms with having to register and all the
other obstacles that I would have to face. I’m not this weird old man
who gets off on watching little kids, or has a rap sheet for being a
predator. That’s not me.
Now that I’m going home soon, my family support was giving me a glimpse
of hope. They want me to write a book to tell my story. I’m not this
animal that the state painted me to be. I just had a messed up childhood
that led to traumatic events. Some of my counselors in juvenile hall
used to tell me to not be so hard on myself, that I should also take
some time to receive help on issues from my past. I’m currently
diagnosed with three major mental health disorders: PTSD stage 2, major
depression disorder, and personality disorder. I take medication for
these disorders.
I don’t ever want to come back to prison, I have experienced things in
this place that I’m embarrassed to talk about. It would break my
family’s heart if they knew what was going on with me inside these
walls. I’m not asking for sympathy or pity. I just want people to
understand to not be so quick to judge or put someone down. In a couple
of months I’ll be home with my family fighting for my happiness and
seeking a better future.
MIM(Prisons) responds: By demonizing everyone in prison who has
committed a sex crime (and this persyn readily admits ey falls in that
category) we can see how people like this writer, who may just need help
to overcome their own history of abuse, are instead terrorized and
further traumatized. It’s hard to see how this demonization is helpful,
or serves to rectify the wrong that was done against a this writer’s
victim.
Those who can admit to and recognize their crimes against others are in
the best position to be rehabilitated and turn their lives to
productively serving the people. Writers like this one are setting an
example of self-criticism and self-awareness. We hope that ey is able to
move past eir own abuse and use those horrible experiences to inspire
future work fighting the patriarchy that creates a culture encouraging
such awful acts. We embrace comrades who can put in the hard work of
self-criticism and rectifying their past wrongs. It does not matter
which crimes against the people we committed, it matters that we are
learning and growing and taking action to fight the imperialist system
that enables and encourages such acts.
July 2018 – In ULK 61 the contentious topic of sex offenders was
discussed with great objectivity (even in certain subjective analyses)
and openness. The following will attempt to clarify, expound and expand
on some of these positions from my perspective.
I wrote, “Excluding all non-sexual depredations (public urination and
such), SOs constitute a dangerous element; more so than murderers
because SOs often have more victims, and many of those victims become
sexual predators, creating one long line of victimization.” As a
rejoinder to this comparison, MIM(Prisons) stated: “When someone is
murdered in lumpen-criminal violence, often there is retaliatory murder,
and subsequent prison time.”
While this may prove accurate among lumpen organizations (LOs) and
loosely associated persons, this is very far from the truth in society,
generally speaking. A majority of people, even a majority of lumpen
class, do not resort to such literal “eye-for-an-eye” justice. While
there are many (mostly males between 14-22 years old) who do seek
retaliatory murders, on the whole they produce a minority to be certain.
Just as murderers constitute a noticeable minority of the
2.3-million-plus currently incarcerated through the United States.
Contrarily, sexual predators affect the entire societal composition.
They perpetrate crimes against males and females, provoking
deep-burrowing psychological problems, and turn many victims into
victimizers (not all turn to outright sexual depredation). There is no
question murder is irrespective of class, gender, nation, and provokes
intense psychological trauma. The difference is not in the severity of
the anti-proletariat crime – taking a life or ruining a life – but in
the after-effects. To make the argument that murder creates murder in
the same, or even similar, manner as sexual victimization creates future
victimizers is beyond stretching. It is a patently false premise. Were
it even close to the reality of present society, there would be anywhere
from 10-50 times more murders and murderers in this country and its
prisons.
Not to be crass, but murder is more of a one-two punch knock out. Where
sexual depredation is twelve rounds of abuse by Robert Duran with your
hands behind your back. Most murderers are not serial killers, which
means their victims are family and known associates. Sexual predators
habitually prey on strangers who fit their desired victim profile, in
addition to relatives, friends, or associates. Murderers are normally
incarcerated once arrested. Sexual predators are often times released.
Also it is much more stigmatizing to be a victim of sexual violence –
shame, feelings of inferiority, desire to vengeance, self-deprecation –
than a murderer’s victim. Desire for justice, feelings of powerlessness,
and greater stigmatization arises from the criminal injustice system’s
treatment of sex crime victims. Many are left feeling as if they are the
perpetrator instead of the victim. This is why so many sex crimes go
unreported. Such is not the case with murders, unless persons decide to
seek vigilante justice. Considering the above, it is clear why a more
negative perspective is attached to SOs than to murderers. Logically, a
murder is traumatic but almost all overcome the event without becoming
killers. In the case of sexual victimization, a slim minority overcome
the stigma, and more than half become victimizers; whether emotionally,
physically, or continue to harm themselves, reliving the victimizations
perpetrated upon them.
“Lumpen criminal violence (created and encouraged by selective
intervention and neglect by the state) is one of the reasons why 1 in 3
New African men will go to prison at some point in their lifetime.” This
is undoubtedly true. Although to state such a statistic to disprove the
“logic” behind SOs being viewed as pariahs more than murderers is
slightly disingenuous. Capitalism is formed in a manner destined to
exclude great numbers of people. Mass incarceration is capitalism’s
answer to this exclusion. This is the manner in which capitalism
addresses the lumpen class it creates in order to maintain a steady
course on the capitalists’ globalization/exploitation road. Crime and
violence are incidental to the system that created a mass lumpen class.
So, while this does “represent a long line of victimization,” it is
inherent to capitalism, but sexual depredation is not.
As it relates to imminent or immediate efforts at rehabilitating sexual
predators, my meaning was that efforts can be made on an individual
basis by revolutionaries who are able to see past label prejudice.
Through their efforts, if conducted scientifically, a systematic method
can emerge for once the revolution is successful. Practice directs
theory and theory is validated in practice, of course. But my overall
meaning was and remains that sex crimes will be a problem for
capitalism, socialism, or communism. Sexual depredation is a social
contagion which transcends borders of politics, gender, economy, class,
nationhood and age. Revolutionaries will need to address the problem
sooner or later. For those who can be ahead of the curve, they should
be. Revolutions need innovative trail blazers as does every department
of humynity.
MIM(Prisons) responds: We appreciate this clarification on this
writer’s article in ULK 61, and find some compelling points here
for distinctions between the impact of murders and sexual assaults.
Though we still maintain that we will need to reform all who can be
reformed, regardless of crimes (conviction or not).
We need to address a few factual questions. The author claims that “SOs
habitually prey on strangers who fit their desired victim profile; in
addition to relatives, friends, or associates”. The reality is that
studies of sexual assault have found that around 70%-75% of survivors
know their rapist. It is a myth that sexual assault is mostly
perpetrated on strangers. This myth serves the racist idea that New
Afrikan men are raping white wimmin. And this falsehood has been used to
target and persecute New Afrikan men going back to the time of slavery,
specifically targeting ones seen as a threat by those in power. So
although this is a minor point in the author’s essay, we want to clarify
the facts.
We want to also address this writer’s comment that “sexual depredation
is a social contagion which transcends…gender.” Sexual assault is one of
the most blatant symptoms of a system of gender oppression. It is the
exercise of gender power. Sexual assault is a product of the patriarchal
system that sets up gender power differences in our society.
And so, we disagree with the author that crime and violence are inherent
to capitalism but sexual depredation is not. In the abstract this makes
sense: sexual depredation is a result of the patriarchy, a system of
gender oppression. Capitalism is a system of class oppression. The two
are distinct systems of oppression.
But society has evolved to intertwine class, gender and national
oppression so intimately that it is not practical to think we can
eliminate one without eliminating the others. Seeing gender oppression
as something outside of capitalism suggests we can eliminate gender
oppression entirely under capitalism. While we can certainly target
aspects of gender inequality and oppression for reform under capitalism,
this is similar to enacting reforms to the systems of national
oppression. We might improve conditions for individuals within the
capitalist system, but the underlying system of oppression will remain.
This doesn’t mean we ignore gender oppression right now. We must expose
it, and we should demand that it be stopped wherever possible. For
instance, fighting against rape in prison is a battle that could reduce
the suffering of many prisoners. But we can also see the outcome of
state responses to prison rape in the ineffectual and sometimes
counter-productive
PREA
regulations.
With that said, we do agree with this writer that we can work now
towards a systematic method to deal with sex offenders and sexual
predators. But we will have fewer resources and less power to help these
individuals reform now, before we have state power.
We won’t reach the stage of communism until we eliminate sex crimes. We
disagree with the author’s assessment that sex crimes will exist in all
systems. Communism is a society without oppression, where all people are
equal. We will have to eliminate class, nation and gender oppression
before we can achieve a communist society. And so this writer is correct
that revolutionaries must address the problem of sex crimes, both sooner
and later. As we discuss in the article “On Punishment
vs. Rehabilitation,” the stage of our struggle will help determine how
we deal with those who commit crimes against the people.
Enclosed is a clipping from the Austin American-Statesman (2018
May 3) I thought pertinent and might be of interest.
Not having first-hand knowledge of the University of Texas (UT) course
“MasculinUT,” I found it interesting that the reactionary philistines
again attacked academia for addressing patriarchal oppression. As far as
I’m concerned, conventional notions of masculinity are a societal
conditioning of the psyche, ergo, much like a Black persyn ensnared in a
eurocentric society, a mind fuck. So, yeah, maybe the yahoos are correct
that traditional concepts of what masculinity entails (e.g., violence
against wimmin) is a mental health issue, and as such, men need to be
subjected to re-conditioning via communist transition. Maybe, like the
bourgeoisie under socialism, men will be repressed. Maybe, hell!
MIM(Prisons) responds: The article enclosed, from the
Statesman, talks about the UT masculinity education program,
which is an awareness campaign formerly run by the University’s
Counseling and Mental Health Center. Conservatives attacked the program,
claiming it treats masculinity as a mental health problem.
In response, the MasculinUT program was moved to Dean of Students, and,
in a statement from its website, “the program’s original steering
committee was reconvened and expanded to provide recommendations and
feedback to ensure that the program’s mission is clearly defined and
fully aligned with its original intent of reducing sexual assault and
interpersonal violence.”
We’re with this comrade in thinking it might not be so bad to think
about masculinity as a mental health issue. As long as we’re clear that
this and many other mental health issues are a product of the capitalist
patriarchy. People aren’t born being sexist idiots. They are trained to
believe that wimmin don’t know what they want, to see wimmin as objects,
and to view maleness as a sign of superiority. People will need a lot of
retraining to overcome a lifetime of patriarchal education.
We don’t know what’s involved in the UT program so we can’t comment on
it. But we can say that after the imperialist patriarchy is overthrown
we’ll have a long period of cultural revolution where we need to
re-invent humyn culture and re-educate everyone to see all people as
equal. This is about the patriarchy, but also about the oppression of
all groups of people over other groups, across the strands of oppression
of nation, class and gender. This involve forcibly repressing
patriarchal culture and institutions. We hope that forcible repression
of half the population (men) will not be necessary, but there will need
to be active promotion of feminists into positions of power, and a
careful re-consideration of the appropriate interactions between all
humyns.
We received a lot of thoughtful responses to Under Lock & Key
61 debating sex offenders. This is a tough topic. It’s easy to
recognize that our culture encourages abuse of wimmin. And there are
many problems with how the criminal injustice system defines sex crimes
and selectively prosecutes this crime. But people don’t want to condone
rape, and many of us have a persynal reaction of horror to sexual
predators that makes it hard to think about this objectively.
Regardless of the societal influences, and the unfair definitions and
prosecutions, there are a lot of people who have committed sex crimes,
and these should not just be ignored or forgiven. This topic got a lot
of people thinking about whether or not sex offenders (SOs) can be part
of the movement, and if they committed sex crimes, if they can be
reformed.
Defining sex crimes
We have all been raised in a culture that promotes sexism and condones
gender oppression. We call this system the patriarchy. It’s a system
where sexy young teen models sell clothes, and TV and movies glorify
powerful men and violence against wimmin. This culture colors every
relationship we have. We’re taught that being a good man means acting
manly and strong and never letting a womyn tell you what to do. And
we’re taught that being a good womyn means submitting to the needs and
desires of your man. With this training, we can’t expect equality in
relationships. And without equality, we can’t expect free consent. Not
everyone has a gun to their heads when they are asked to consent to sex,
but there are a lot of different forms of power and persuasion.
So we’re starting out with a messed up system of gender oppression, and
then we’re trying to define which acts of sexual violation count as
coerced (rape) and which are just “normal.” One California prisoner
wrote:
“I want to comment on the sex offender topic. Yeah it’s rough because
like the Nevada 17 1/2 yr old dude it’s just that easy to get caught up.
As adults we’re able to date 18-19 year olds as a 40-50 year old.
“I mean if people are going to argue 15 year old and an 18 is different,
the question is why/how? If their answer isn’t ‘I just want my baby girl
to be my baby girl a few more years’ then their answer is B.S., because
that’s what it really boils down to.
“Moving on, the sex offender umbrella is too big. Like it was mentioned,
a person taking a leak in public is considered a sex offender? We
haven’t always had toilets, let’s get real and go after the real sex
offenders – fully adult male/female taking advantage of a child. That’s
a sex offender! 20, 30, 40 year old trying to sleep with a 13 year old –
sex offender! Possession of child pornography – sex offender!”
This writer raises the question of age to define sex crimes. We ask, why
is a 20 year old sleeping with a 13 year old rape, but a 20 year old
with a 15 year old isn’t? Probably because this writer believes a 15
year old is capable of consent but a 13 year old isn’t. That’s the key
question: who has the ability to give consent?
Truly free consent isn’t possible from within a system that promotes
gender oppression from birth. But that’s not a useful answer when trying
to define crimes from the revolutionary perspective. And if we’re going
to attempting to rehab/punish people who have committed sex crimes, we
have to decide what is a reasonable level of consent.
For now, we maintain that we should judge people for their actions, not
the label they’re given by the criminal injustice system. As this
comrade from Maryland explains, society creates sexual predators who act
in many different ways, but their actions all show us they are
counter-revolutionary.
“I was reading one article on sex offenders in ULK 61, and it was
talking about how to determine whether they did the crime or not. The
thought came to me of judge of character, their interactions with males
& females, whether prisoners or C.O.s, and the traces of
conversations when they feel comfortable. Even those who don’t have
sexual offense charges sometimes make you wonder by the way they
jerk-off to female C.O.s & female nurses or what they say to them
that have you think if they are undercover sex offenders.
“One prisoner went as far as getting the female nurse information off
the internet and called them on the jail phone and got (admin)
(Administration Segregation). This is the same person that comes back
and forth for jerking off to multiple disciplinary segregation terms,
but is locked up for a totally different charge. He’s a future sex
offender, that can’t be trusted for help in the revolution not due to a
label, but due to his character and interactions when he sees females.
“Then you have the ones that have been locked-up in their teenage years
and they’re currently in their 30s, and like to chase boys who are easy
to manipulate or who want sexual activity. One is big on being a
victimizer, but knows and talks a lot of Revolutionary preferences. He
has a lot of knowledge but can’t be trusted to prevail due to lack of
discipline and wanting to continue in his prison rapes & prison sex
crimes that he rejoiced in. But he is another one that is not locked up
for any sex offenses. Both were juveniles when incarcerated and have
been psychologically damaged and lack change & further
rehabilitation. Everyone still embraces them in general population and
looks past their sexual activities.
“How can people that exploit sexual habits right in clear view of the
prisoners be embraced and not looked upon as potential threats to
society, families, and fellow prisoners, when you have someone labeled
as a sex offender through childhood friendships and has to be sectioned
off & outcasted by other prisoners due to the label of sex offender
and not background information, the character of the man, their
interactions with same sex and opposite sex, and the signs & symbols
through their conversation?”
This writer’s view is echoed by a comrade in Texas who has come to
realize we need to judge people for their actions:
“UFPP is a must! Regardless of what you did to get in prison (rape, rob,
murder), I (also a prisoner) only judge you or anyone on how they go
forward from this day in prison. I used to work in food service and I
would break a serving into fifths for women in prison for killing or
abusing children. Then I grew up and got over myself. How do I know they
were rightfully convicted and how do I know how they got in this prison
life? I don’t. We’re all in the same spot starting out. What you do from
this time forward is your description for me. And people can change. I
have.”
When we look objectively at how many people, both in prison and in
society in general, commit sex crimes, it’s pretty depressing. The
recent #MeToo movement helped expose just how many sexual predators are
in the entertainment industry in particular. And writers like the one
above expose individual cases of predators behind bars. This is so
common because of a culture that promotes gender inequality. As long as
we see wimmin/girls as objects for sexual pleasure we will have a
problem with sex crimes. Another prisoner described this pervasive
problem in California:
“This letter is in regards to the sex offenders articles in ULK
61. We cannot”always” trust a state to tell us what crimes someone
has committed - but most of the time we can. It might not always be so
clear, but the majority of the time the person convicted of a sex crime
did indeed do it.
“Of the thousands of people I’ve come across in the SNY prisons I’ve
been in, absolutely nobody has claimed his pc 290 case is for urinating
in public. The most common is sex with a minor as there is absolutely no
thing in the state of California as consensual sex with anyone under age
18. I know this all too well because sex with a teen put me where I’m
at.
“There are probably as many different variables that create sex
offenders as there are types of sex offenders themselves. The
overwhelming factor with the sex offenders I’ve met in prison (and
there’s a lot of sex offenders in prison) is drug abuse, especially
methamphetamine. It’s safe to say that most sex offenders (at least
60-70%) were driven by the effects of meth. There are many in prison who
will admit to sex with underage females. Growing up in the housing
project of San Francisco’s Mission District I knew a lot of adults
(mostly men) that had sexual relationships (and even marriages) with
teens. It was very common also that the girls my age as a teen carried
on with grown men.
“Go to a Latina’s traditional 15th birthday celebration and count the
amount of males over 20 yrs old. Yes, that is what many are there for:
the girls. Do younger girls’ parents know about this? Yes, most do.
Cinco de Mayo has become another reason for America to party. Latin
foods, beers, music, piñatas, etc. We’ve welcomed with open arms. Are we
going to pretend that these ‘other’ traditions from Latin America don’t
exist and just continue to tag and store sex offenders or will something
be done to address this issue?
This writer makes a good point: lots of sex crime charges are real. Many
men have committed these crimes. But there’s no need to rely on what the
state tells us. In fact this writer demonstrates that people are being
honest with em about eir past crimes. We don’t gain anything by trusting
the criminal injustice system, and we don’t need to.
This comrade helps demonstrate our point that sex with teens is condoned
by capitalist culture. These cultural influences encourage men to see
their behavior taking advantage of wimmin, and pursuing teens, as normal
and acceptable. We won’t stop this completely until we get rid of the
patriarchy and have the power to create a proletarian culture.
Can criminals be reformed?
An important organizing question of today regarding sex offenders is
whether or not they can be part of the revolutionary movement. This
inspires a lot of debate behind bars. A comrade from Maryland provides
some good examples of people becoming revolutionaries in spite of
history of anti-people crimes. We agree with eir analysis that everyone
who has committed crimes against the people (sex offenders, drug
dealers, murderers, etc.) has the potential to reform and be a part of
the revolutionary movement. Whether or not we have the resources to help
make this happen is discussed in
“On
Punishment vs Rehabilitation.”
“Eldridge Cleaver was incarcerated for rape upon little white girls and
was not on Protective Custody, nor was he a victim, but the victimizer.
[Cleaver was actually incarcerated for assault, but was open that he had
raped wimmin and even attempted to justify it politically. - ULK Editor]
Though upon his parole release he worked for a newspaper company until
his run-in with Huey Newton at this newspaper company and joined the
Black Panther Party to become later down the line a leader within the
BPP political organization. James Carr was another that participated in
prison rapes even though he grew to become a instrument for the BPP, a
body-guard for Huey Newton upon his release, and a prison vanguard
alongside George L. Jackson. Basically, saying that in their era they
were not faulted by the political group for their past, but were looked
upon what they could do in the present and future.
“With what the United States set as standards are only accountable for
those who are out of their class and who they don’t care about, while
their class gets away with such crimes or slapped on the wrist with the
least time as possible. They have messed us up psychologically mass
media. So even if the people don’t know if the crime is true, what the
state places upon us as fraud charges, our mindset is automatically it’s
true cause America says it’s true. Just like when we see people on the
news wanted for questioning about a crime, we automatically say he did
it without knowing.
“Did the Revolutionaries of the 60s, 70s, and 80s not participate in the
Anti-People Crimes as modern day even though they were Vanguards for the
people and just as conscious as we are. Did they not sell illegal drugs
to raise money for court fees & bail fees? Did they not drink
alcohol and smoke weed & cigarettes? Did they not graduate to hard
drugs? Did they not shoot or stab people in their lifetime? Did they not
commit sexual assaults? That’s why we are able to learn from their
mistake, while also cherishing their great stands of Revolution. So
within criticism, criticize all through all eras and let those who want
to prove their self do it. If sex offenders, whether guilty or not,
started their own organization that was aligned with the same goals,
principles, and practices as MIM(Prisons), would you support them or
acknowledge their efforts? Do you feel that if a sex offender, guilty or
not, got conscious and changed for the better is capable of being a
positive tribute to a Revolution?”
On this same topic a Wisconsin prisoner disagrees and sees the
example of Eldridge Cleaver as a detriment to the movement overall.
“I personally do not believe there is a place in the movement for sex
offenders, and when I say sex offenders I’m referring to those who are
in prison for committing sex crimes, not statutory rape, where he’s 17
and she’s 16 or even if he’s 20 and she’s 16. I’m, talking about
un-consentual, outright rape of women, men and children. I don’t have
any affinity for those who rape prisoners or prison female officers and
staff.
“A lot of people bring up Eldridge Cleaver to support the argument of
reform for rapists, where to me Eldridge was not a true revolutionary,
he helped bring down the BPP and his mistreatment of Kathleen Cleaver,
Elaine Brown and others was egregious at best and outright barbaric at
worst. I don’t knock those who have compassion and believe in reform for
sex offenders, I’m just not one of them.”
While we disagree with this writer’s statement that SOs can’t be
reformed, we agree that embracing those who promote gender oppression
because of their correct line on national oppression can be very
dangerous for a revolutionary movement. The Black Panther Party
struggled with gender oppression, but in many ways was ahead of other
movements and organizations of their day. This doesn’t mean they got it
all right, but we have to judge people and movements in the context of
their struggle.
Finally, Legion writes compellingly about the potential for
rehabilitation of SOs and also offers a framework for undertaking this
work.
“So I’m sitting here eating a bowl of cereal and digesting ULK 61
and comrade
El
Independista made some valid points and MIM(Prisons) dissented. See
when we sparked this debate we were struggling with starting a NLO
consisting of comrades who have fucked up jackets who are willing to put
pride, ego, individualistic patriarchal thoughts and practices to the
wayside forming a column of revolutionaries who are given a chance to
show and prove that the state was wrong and that U-C-U works for all
instead of some. Answering El Independista’s questions of possible
solutions isolation, ostracization, extermination may I build?
“First and foremost as a revolutionary raised in the game I’d rather
deal with a SO than a snitch or a jailhouse thief. Why? Because in most
cases the SO can be re-educated if given the ability to perform. If a
potential comrade has been framed by the state who will hear him out.
He’s isolated like the sex offender island in Washington State off of
puget sound. Ostracization is another word for shun if the SO shuns
his/her anti-people conviction and uses unity-criticism-unity to combat
the patriarchy and upholds the merits of a drafted constitution along
with personal U-C-U known as self-criticism you can begin to mold
revolutionaries who ostracize themselves. Then there is extermination,
another word for ending re-education self-critique and revolutionary
bent will cause an ill (as in sick) blow to the injustice system. It’s
all or none. And no, I’m not harboring cho-mos and rapos, just willing
to do the work to see us free all of us. For example, if a column of
reformed SOs took up a revolutionary mindset and put said mindset into
practice one would exterminate a whole under represented class of
people.
“In California the Penal Code 226(a) is any sex crime. 266(h-j) have to
do with pimping and pandering, 288 is a molester, 290 is the required
registration code. Most kidnappers have to register for life. If you’re
a John you have to register and if you’re a prostitute you have to
register. If you opt into a shoot out and a child was involved you have
to register, and child endangerment is a sex crime. As well as rape,
peeing on the side walk, flashing. In prison all these cases get ‘P’
coded which prohibits the captive from ever being level 1 where there is
minimal politics, and forces one to live in enclosed structures with
secure doors AKA cell living. This leaves level”P” coded prisoners in 3
and 4 yards. These yards are political, whether GP or SNY there are
politics. And on these yards you have folks with a knack for praying on
the weak, creating a pattern of sexual abuse. Just look at any day room
wall you’ll see the # for the PREA hot-line and a slogan that says ‘no
means no and yes is not allowed.’
“People, we have to prepare for the white wolf invasion. You can’t bully
the SO problem away. You have to be a social scientist and commentator
and build institutions that collapse the structure. And to answer
MIM(prison), most SOs are on SNY yards and you have these snitch gangs
who look to isolate, ostracize and eliminate”threats.” Most SOs aren’t
rats, hell most aren’t even criminals, no rap sheet only accusations.
But these “gangsters” need a common enemy, and an easy target is the SO.
As a ‘do what’s best-ist’ I would, if given the platform to do so,
launch the wolf collective and invite all who read ULK to join,
not as a member but as a witness to the scientific display of
revolutionary conduct. I do this to sacrifice self for the masses.
“Start with self-critique and a solid understanding of your
errors. Make serious revolutionary action your priority Honor
and respect all human beings’ dignity Never go backwards in thought
walk and push Stand all the way up for what is righteous and do
what’s leftover You will be judged by your political work and
political line.
“You might think I’m crazy or nuts but I have 36 nuts and bolts that say
otherwise. The mathematics makes sense to turn nuts to plugs you plug in
nuts meaning you become the change you want to see, and if I have to
build the collective brick by brick stone by stone I will. I’m a convict
first for all the would-be haters, but I think the time has come to form
an infection on the skin of the beast.”
Until, and perhaps after, we achieve a society where the culture of
capitalist individualism has been destroyed, revolutionary organizations
will have to deal with crimes against the people. We need to protect our
movement from harm, and we must balance how to protect it from all
sides. In some cases, punishment will be appropriate. But our primary
focus will always be rehabilitation. Here we will discuss how we think
about punishment and rehabilitation in the different stages of
revolutionary struggle.(see definitions in Notes below)
Simply punishing someone for a behavior is a generally accepted, but
widely ineffective, method of changing that persyn’s behavior. There is
first the consideration of whether the persyn is compelled by the
punishment to change their behavior. (What does the punishment mean to
the one being punished? Does the punishment match the crime?) Second is
the consideration of whether the persyn being punished understands their
crime and how the punishment relates to the crime. So simply punishing
someone without providing any accompanying rehabilitation may serve the
purposes of satisfying the victims, or detering others from doing the
same behavior, but it does little to change that persyn’s behavior or
change eir mind about eir behavior.
Crimes against the people
Crimes against the people are actions that harm the oppressed,
either directly or by harming the revolutionary movement of the
oppressed. In our current context, they include things like snitching to
pigs, facilitating drug addiction, stealing from the masses, and a long
list of other counter-revolutionary actions. The list of crimes that
must be dealt with today, directly (versus crimes that can’t be dealt
with until during the wartime period, or post-revolution) will change as
we move through stages of struggle. Additionally, what is possible for
us to deal with will also change over time, as we grow in strength and
acquire more resources.
Even though we see many crimes against the people committed around us
daily, we only have so much capacity to try to rehabilitate people, and
an even more limited ability for punishment. But while lacking the time
and resources to rehabilitate everyone, we also must keep in mind the
consequences to the movement of punishing counter-revolutionary actors.
Doling out punishment can have potentially dangerous consequences, yet
it might be the only option available to us in certain circumstances. So
whether to punish vs. rehabilitate is not simply a question of what we
are able to do, but also what will be best for the revolutionary
movement.
Overall, focus on rehabilitation
There are no cut and dry guidelines on this question of relabilitaion
vs. punishment. Our actions will depend on many factors, and we can only
figure this out in practice. Focusing too much on hypotheticals only
clouds our judgement when we are faced with an actual crime that we need
to deal with.
Yet on the overall question of whether to focus on rehabilitation or
punishment, we look to Mao’s injunction that we focus on rehabilitation
of those who make mistakes but are open to correcting their errors and
rehabilitating their political line and practice:
“A person with appendicitis is saved when the surgeon removes his
appendix. So long as a person who has made mistakes does not hide his
sickness for fear of treatment or persist in his mistakes until he is
beyond cure, so long as he honestly and sincerely wishes to be cured and
to mend his ways, we should welcome him and cure his sickness so that he
can become a good comrade. We can never succeed if we just let ourselves
go, and lash out at him. In treating an ideological or a political
malady, one must never be rough and rash but must adopt the approach of
‘curing the sickness to save the patient’, which is the only correct and
effective method.” (Mao Zedong, “Rectify the Party’s Style of Work” (1
February 1942, Selected Works, Vol. III)
Before the proletariat seizes state power
We are in the pre-revolutionary period right now. Pre-revolution
includes the current period of “relatively peaceful” organizing, and the
period of outright war when the oppressed fight to take control of the
state. The oppressed-nation lumpen in the United $tates face
life-or-death circumstances every day, including consequences of
imprisonment, economic disparity, inter-lumpen violence, police
violence, and attacks from various white nationalists at all levels of
society. While we face daily violence, our organizing at this time
primarily focuses on self-defense and building independent institutions
of the oppressed. That’s why we call this a “relatively peaceful”
organizing period, where we focus on preparation.(1)
Pre-revolution Organizing
In our day-to-day struggle, many counter-revolutionary actions will not
be a question of life and death as they are in wartime. But they are
still serious and potentially dangerous to the movement. This is the
period when we have the least power to carry out punishment and to
rehabilitate effectively. We should strive for rehabilitation when
possible, but with limited power and resources we will need to evaluate
each case to determine what we can accomplish.
While we don’t have state power, when rehabilitation is not an option,
we still have enough power in some situations to punish crimes against
the people. This punishment most often involves exclusion from the
movement, but can include public criticism and more physical actions.
Our actions in this regard will need to be carefully considered in each
case.
The case of snitches comes up a lot in prison organizing, where many
attempt to curry favor with the guards in this way. Snitches are
counter-revolutionary actors who must be cut out from the movement,
though we may lack the power to appropriately punish snitches (beyond
exclusion) at this time. But we also believe that snitches, and everyone
else who commits crimes against the people, have the potential for
rehabilitation through education and struggle if we have the opportunity
to engage with them deeply. However, that’s not always a good use of our
time right now. Those who see the error of their ways and come to us
with self-criticism for their past actions are clearly an easier target
for rehabilitation and revolutionary education. Each case will require
individual consideration. Those involved in the struggle and impacted by
the crimes will have to assess the appropriate response and mix of
re-education and punishment.
At Southern Ohio Correctional Facility in Lucasville, Ohio in 1993,
prisoners were throwing their trash on the tier in a protest. In the
book Condemned by Bomani Shakur (Keith LaMar) we learn the
details. This protest was going on for several days and the guards
brought in a trustee to clean the tier. The prisoners tried to talk with
this trustee over multiple days, to get em to refuse the job, yet the
trustee kept cleaning the tier. The protesting prisoners punished the
trustee violently. In this case we see the correct method of
first attempting to struggle with someone who is acting against
the movement, and later taking more direct action to shut em down to
protect the movement. We can’t judge this specific incident from afar,
and it is something revolutionaries will have to figure out in
day-to-day struggle.
Pre-revolution active wartime
Times of war are, of course, characterized by the use of violence and
killing of the enemy as the default means of achieving goals. In
wartime, the primary focus is on destroying the enemy, and this includes
killing counter-revolutionaries. Anyone who acts to support the
imperialists is swiftly punished. Some of these crimes merit death, as
actions that result in the deaths of many revolutionaries cannot be
tolerated.
“Mao Z reminds us in one of his military essays, of the insight from von
Clausewitz, that war is different from all other human
activity.
”When you check out the record, you can get the
feeling that young Mao Z barely bothered to conceal how much he wanted
to rip the Li Li-san faction right out of the ‘red’ military and rural
party, by any means necessary. No matter how flimsy the excuse or
reason, he really didn’t care. To him, the revolution had to
disentangele itself, to meet a life-or-death challenge, as quickly as
possible.
“…Mao Z and Chu Teh weren’t in suburban California,
judging or dismissing cases of individuals in a civilian situation. That
would be one set of circumstances. They were in a remote war zone, deep
in the countryside, preparing feverishly for the largest and possibly
most decisive battle any of them had ever gone through, raw soldiers and
officers alike. Any disadvantage could cost them everything, while any
advantage might be life-saving. That was a different set of
circumstances.”(2)
During the revolutionary wars of the USSR and China, they did not always
have the time or resources to attempt to convince traitors to rejoin the
revolution, and in many cases they could not even set up prisons to
contain these enemies for future rehabilitation. Mao’s guerillas had to
turn around and execute lumpen forces that had previously fought
side-by-side with them against the Kuomintang. At other times, the
People’s Liberation Army was able to successfully recruit whole sections
of the Kuomintang army into their ranks. Again, an in-the-moment
assessment of our threats and capabilities, with a preference for
rehabilitation whenever possible, will be necessary even during wartime.
Post-revolution
When we have state power, we will be in a better position to
rehabilitate people. But in the short term the masses will demand
punishment for those who owe blood debts. In China shortly after the
anti-Japanese war was won and the Communist Party took power, Mao
addressed this topic:
“The number of counter-revolutionaries to be killed must be kept within
certain proportions. The principle to follow here is that those who owe
blood debts or are guilty of other extremely serious crimes and have to
be executed to assuage the people’s anger and those who have caused
extremely serious harm to the national interest must be unhesitatingly
sentenced to death and executed without delay. As for those whose crimes
deserve capital punishment but who owe no blood debts and are not
bitterly hated by the people or who have done serious but not extremely
serious harm to the national interest, the policy to follow is to hand
down the death sentence, grant a two-year reprieve and subject them to
forced labour to see how they behave. In addition, it must be explicitly
stipulated that in cases where it is marginal whether to make an arrest,
under no circumstances should there be an arrest and that to act
otherwise would be a mistake, and that in cases where it is marginal
whether to execute, under no circumstances should there be an execution
and that to act otherwise would be a mistake.”(3)
In this situation, the Communist Party was acknowledging that it could
not get too far ahead of the masses. Punishing those who had committed
extremely serious crimes was part of demonstrating to the masses that
the Party was acting in their interests. But the goal was not punishment
and execution. The goal was to move as many people towards
rehabilitation as possible. And we can’t know who has the potential for
rehabilitation until we try. Overall, communists should assume that all
people can be educated/re-educated because humyns have great capacity to
learn and grow, especially when removed from harmful/reactionary
circumstances.
Of course forced labor in China was a punishment for these
counter-revolutionaries. But it was also an opportunity for reform and
rehabilitation. As we learn in the book Prisoners of Liberation
by Adele and Allyn Rickett, even people who had served as spies for
imperialists during the war were given a chance at rehabilitation. The
Ricketts, in China for academic study on a Fullbright Scholarship, were
passing information to the Amerikkkan and Briti$h governments. This was
while the Chinese were fighting for control of Beijing and then into the
imperialist war on Korea, in which the Chinese were fighting against
Amerikan troops.
The Ricketts were spies in wartime. Yet the Chinese Communists did not
execute them. Instead they were imprisoned in a facility where the
emphasis was on re-education and self-criticism. It took both Allyn and
Adele years to come to an understanding of why their actions were wrong.
But during that time they were never physically abused. Their forced
confinement was certainly a punishment, but in the end they came to see
this time in a Chinese prison as justified and a valuable educational
experience that made them both better people. They were transformed.
Balance of forces for punishment and rehabilitation
In all cases, we must balance several considerations:
The weight of the crimes of a persyn
The sentiment of the masses towards that persyn and their crimes
The power we have to implement rehabilitation programs effectively
The ability to perform punishment if deemed appropriate
Our assessment of the above considerations will change based on our
stage of struggle and our ever-evolving strength and abilities. In all
cases revolutionaries should strive to reform and rehabilitate as many
people as possible. But the limits of our resources pre-revolution, the
need for expedience on life-and-death situations in wartime, and the
need to fulfill the masses’ demand for justice post-war must also be
taken into account.