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.
[This is a belated resolution from the MIM(Prisons) 2010 Congress.]
Overall, MIM(Prisons) stands by the
Resolutions
on Cell Structure passed at the last MIM congress in 2005. After 5
years of putting that resolution into practice there is experience to
sum up and questions that still need to be answered.
The theoretical basis for the cell structure is that the strength of a
centralized party comes into play when vying for state power, whether by
elections or otherwise. That is not in the cards for Maoists in the
imperialist countries at this time. Maoism is a minority movement in the
First World and will continue to be so for the foreseeable future. This
makes it even more important that we utilize our strengths and shore up
our weaknesses.
One of the main lessons to take from the cell structure resolutions is
that “[w]e oppose having geographic cells come into contact with each
other face-to-face. Infiltration and spying are rampant when it comes to
MIM. The whole strength of having a locality-based cell is that it is
possible to do all the things traditional to a movement. The security
advantages of culling people we know into a cell are lost the moment we
slack off on security and start accepting strangers or meeting with
strangers face-to-face.” We find it frustrating that critics of what
happened at etext.org as MIM faced repression are willing to ignore the
lessons of those setbacks.
At the last MIM congress in 2005, they spoke of a “MIM Center” that put
out the newspaper, among other tasks. Soon after, there was no
MIM
Notes newspaper, followed by the degeneration of the original MC
cell and finally the shutting down of their last institution, the
website at etext.org.
One of the challenges of small cells is developing and maintaining line.
Much work has been done, and if every new group or every revolutionary
had to start from scratch, we would never advance. That is why when
etext.org was repressed, MIM(Prisons) posted an archive of the MIM site
on our website. While we still do not have a regular newspaper for the
movement as a whole, the website is a crucial reference for us all.
Fraternal organizations do not agree on everything; they agree on
cardinal principles that are determined by the conditions of the time.
The etext.org site is not something Maoists must agree with 100%, but
there is no doubt that it is still the most comprehensive starting point
for any Maoist organization in the First World.
Democratic centralism is important for security and for political line
development. Yet until we are organizing on a countrywide basis, there
is no need for democratic centralism at that level, not to mention
internationally.
In guerilla warfare, the cell structure has been applied in a way that
was hierarchical so that action cells were separate from each other, but
each cell could be traced to the top of the organization. This relies on
a centralized organization or center. While MIM mentions such a center
being based around MIM Notes and etext.org in their 2005 resolutions, we
do not see the need for this center given the current circumstances. As
we have recognized before, certain ideological centers are bound to
exist based on the law of uneven development. Yet such centers are not
structural, but fluid, based on the type and amount of work done.
All that said, there is an inherent contradiction in the cell strategy.
Since organizing strategy and security tactics are not dividing line
questions, once the cell strategy is adopted and full decentralization
has occurred, it is possible for cells to change their line on this
question. Even the majority could do so and a new centralized party
could push remaining cells to the periphery. Since we work to build a
movement and not our individual organizations, and our work is already
on the periphery, we should not be concerned about the impacts of such a
move on our organization. It is, however, worrisome to the extent that
we see our comrades opened up to attacks through faulty security.
Part of accepting cell strategy is distinguishing between cadre work and
mass work. The self-described anarchist movement is able to mobilize
large numbers in mass work while abhorring centralized organization. We
should learn from their example, while not succumbing to liberalism in
our security practices or abandoning scientific leadership.
Getting the correct balance of cadre work and mass work will be more
challenging with a cell structure. There is no way to impose a balance
on the movement as a whole without a center, but we can pay attention to
what is going on around us and get in where we fit in. Leading cells
should not be shy to point out where the movement needs more investment
of resources.
One amendment we would make to the “Resolutions on Cell Structure” is to
cut the suggestion that a one-persyn cell “in many ways… has the least
worries security-wise!” Certainly, one-persyn cells should maintain high
standards for admitting others. However, the value of
criticism/self-criticism on the level of day-to-day work is something
that is stressed within Maoism, and we’ve benefited from in our own
practice in MIM(Prisons). We still need democratic centralism with the
cell structure to provide crucial discipline and accountability. The
criticisms we can give and get from other cells will be limited in
nature if our security is correct. And we have seen how one-persyn cells
can degrade or disappear quickly.
The November 2 elections promise some shuffling of the imperialist
representatives in government, but as usual with elections where the
choices are limited to different flavors of imperialist leaders, there
will be no real change. One ballot initiative that did catch our
attention is Proposition 19 in California which would legalize and
regulate marijuana.
In an attempt to reduce support for Prop 19, on 30 September 2010
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a law that changes the
punishment for possession of less than an ounce of pot to just a fine.
This reduces the potential impact of Prop 19 and should cut down on the
number of people in prison for marijuana possession. But even arrests
and convictions without a prison sentence have negative repercussions,
so Prop 19 goes farther in limiting the reach of the state in terms of
possession laws.
MIM(Prisons) supports any laws that will cut back on the number of
people locked up in prison or otherwise controlled by the imperialist
state. We know that drug laws (like other laws) are disproportionately
prosecuted against oppressed nations within U.$. borders, resulting in
huge numbers of Blacks and Latinos behind bars. For this reason we would
support legalizing all drugs to take power away from the imperialist
government and its criminal injustice system.
In 2009, just over half of the drug arrests were for marijuana (848,408
out of 1,663,583).(1) Marijuana arrests are growing as a proportion of
total drug arrests in the U.$., up to 52.6% in 2009 from 39.9% in 1995.
This is driven by arrests for simple possession, the percentage of
arrests for marijuana trafficking has not changed much over time.(2)
Adding to these statistics on marijuana arrests is compelling
information on the disproportionate use of marijuana laws against Black
men in California. The Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice reports:
“African Americans, just 6% of the state’s population…comprise a
staggering 45% of the 1,600 Californians imprisoned for marijuana,
including more than half of those locked up for marijuana felonies.
Blacks are nearly 4 times more likely to be arrested for marijuana than
other races, a racial gap only slightly wider than for other crimes. But
after African Americans enter California’s ‘Black marijuana system,’
disparities multiply more than for any other offense. Seven in 10 Black
marijuana arrestees are charged with felonies, compared to one-fifth for
other races. Blacks convicted of marijuana felonies are 3 times more
likely to be sent to prison than Nonblack marijuana felons. The upshot
of these accumulating discriminations is that Blacks wind up being
imprisoned for marijuana at 8 times the rate of Hispanics and 18 times
the rate of Whites. At older ages, the Black-Nonblack marijuana
imprisonment gap soars to nearly 4,000%… No other offense (including
violent, property, and other crimes) and no other drug (including
heroin, methamphetamine, and crack) even remotely displays the huge
racial discrepancies in imprisonment for marijuana.”(3)
The new law would not completely eliminate marijuana arrests and
prosecutions, primarily because it restricts the legal age to 21 and
only allows possession of small quantities, but they would be greatly
reduced. In addition, the federal government has promised to challenge
the constitutionality of Prop 19 if it passes, and to enforce the
federal laws in California regardless. Of course we can’t look at these
laws in a vacuum, the criminal injustice system will not cut back on the
police force or shrink the prisons simply because one law changes. Cops
will just find other reasons to arrest people, and those people will
continue to be disproportionately Black and Latino.
Even worse, cities like Oakland will likely be using the new tax
revenues to restore its recently cut back police force. The city stands
to be one of the biggest beneficiaries if the law passes, as it is home
to Oaksterdam University, which will be licensing large growing and
distribution centers under the new law. The financial interests behind
Oaksterdam University bankrolled the introduction of Prop 19 to the
November ballot. Los Angeles campus chancellor Jeff Jones pointed out
that support has come primarily from the jobs and tax revenue angle. He
says that focusing on imprisonment rates gets little support from
Californians.
While the imperialists run the global drug trade, here the state is
partnering with corporate interests to take over the local industry,
which has been the domain of the lumpen class. Following the national
liberation movements of the sixties many in the ghetto who didn’t see
the Amerikan dream through integration were able to find an income
through the drug economy. By the 1970s, Italians, Jews and others who
dominated black markets, in particular drugs, had long been integrated
into white Amerika. Whites left the inner cities for the suburbs where
they could become richer more easily by joining a growing financial
sector, allowing for Black and Latino gangs to take over profitable
street crime in their own areas. Organized crime, led by the CIA, backed
the most individualistic and destructive emerging groups, while
repressing Black and Brown power movements and flooding these
neighborhoods with cocaine.(4)
Faced with economic crisis today, white Amerika wants these jobs back.
And the state is leading the charge, hoping to reach a new tax source to
close huge shortfalls in paying their bureaucrat employees - especially
their pigs, who account for 85% of city spending in Oakland (police
& fire combined).(5) But whites aren’t forming a new mafia (at least
not exactly). Instead they formed a new university to train and certify
workers in the industry and they have joined labor unions to ensure
wages of $25.75 an hour with pensions, paid vacations and health
insurance.(6) In contrast, reports from the 1990s showed that most in
the drug game in the inner cities made around minimum wage and worked
long hours (needless to say with no benefits).(7) So the state hopes to
shrink the workforce in drug sales and production, pay a few trained
workers a nice sum, and increase their share of profits from the sale of
marijuana to pay cops and other state employees. In the process, the
economic crisis will be passed along to the lumpen who will become ever
more desperate to make ends meet. This will lead to more violence and
problems, and make the need for self-determination more dire in
oppressed nation communities that lack legal job markets.
While MIM(Prisons) supports the passage of laws that result in fewer
people in prison, we are under no illusions that even full legalization
of drugs in Amerika will solve the drug problems here. As we have seen
with alcohol, legalization of a drug does not make for safe use.
Amerikan culture is alienating and leads to rampant legal and illegal
drug abuse. According to a World Health Organization survey of 17
countries across the globe, the U.$ leads the world in users of both
legal and illegal drugs. Drug use is correlated with wealth of a country
with the richer countries having a higher percentage of drug users.(8)
It will take a revolution to create a culture that allows people to feel
valuable, safe and empowered and not in need of the easy escape that can
be found in drugs. After the revolution in China, the Maoist-led country
basically eliminated drug addiction through community-based campaigns.
Drug addiction, particularly to opium, was a widespread problem imported
by the British. But after the revolution there was a strong focus on
helping drug addicts get clean, and on giving everyone useful work and
education as well as health care. This campaign, combined with a
strategy of wiping out opium growing and distribution in favor of much
needed food crops, virtually eliminated the drug problems in China by
the early 1950s. Only with a government that serves the people rather
than working to enrich its imperialist masters will we be able to
eliminate drug abuse and the criminal injustice system. As we work
towards such a system we will support laws that result in fewer people
in prison, but we know the impact of these laws will be minimal at best.
I would like to say something about the
article
by the drop out skinhead who became an SNY. It is good that this person
is involving himself in MIM because MIM can remedy some line questions
concerning progress. This is i believe the underlying issue with the
snitch question, and many other strategies.
Here’s a valuable quote,
“Our public relations policy is based on anonymity, which is to say,
attraction rather than promotion; we need to always maintain personal
anonymity at the level of press, internet, radio etc. Anonymity is the
spiritual foundation of all our traditions, ever reminding us to place
principles before personalities. Understanding these traditions comes
slowly over time. We pick up information as we talk to members and visit
various groups. By following these guidelines in our dealings with
others, and society at large, we avoid problems. We still have to face
difficulties as they arise; communication problems, differences of
opinion, internal controversies, and troubles with individuals and
groups outside the fellowship. However we apply these principles, we
avoid some pitfalls. Many of our problems are like those that our
predecessors had to face. Their hard won experiences gave birth to these
traditions, and our own experience has shown that these principles are
just as valid today as they were when these traditions were formulated.
Our traditions protect us from the internal and external forces that
could destroy us.”
From where? Mao Zedong’s red book? No, a narcotics anonymous pamphlet!!
But does it really matter where it comes from, or the merit of the
content?
This is my objection to going SNY. Only because these three letters
mean, “you have told the police information”. You have strengthened the
hand of the police by information. You have dialed 911 and gave 411. For
me, that’s the foul. Now of course the gangs that these people walked
away from have a different objection than this one. But it is very
common for gangs to split, or have coups from within, or be taken over
by other gangs… examples abound! John Gotti killed his own boss to
become the boss, Lucky Luciano made peace treaties with the NY mafias
and founded ‘Murder Inc’ - his own army.
Such putchism and naked self interest is not at all a new feature of
gang activity and reality. Neither is martyrdom an estranged element of
nazism or fascism. Both Mussolini and Hitler were killed in 1945. The
drop out skinhead seems to have had a “disillusionment” about his
experience with other skinheads. Can it be possible, that a group that
espouses an ideology of national socialism, that claims to be not a gang
but a “social movement”, can surprise its own members with hidden
tenants and protocols? This person talks as if he was conscripted or
enslaved by his own group and liberated by SNY.
A motif that puts principle above inter-personalism and sentiment that
does not connect to the concepts above about anonymity. Rather avoiding
line issue progress, but material canteen, coffee pack type motivations.
Disconnected from the imperatives of duty, social progress and
revolution! Fascism claimed to be and was revolutionary! Marx explained
that the bourgeois has historically played quite a revolutionary role in
relation to the establishments that come before it. But also explained
how these bourgeois revolutions did not benefit or literate the 3rd
estate, the proletariat or the international proletariat. The 4th of
July being such a type of bourgeois revolution… while they held others
as slave.
SNY (Sensitive Needs Yard) or PC (Protective Custody) is now very
popular in prison. I think that many prisons have a majority of PC
prisoners over mainline. Both of these concepts come from the cops! and
many prisoners have let these concepts creep into their consciousness
and thinking. As MIM theory 4 said, “many of these people use FBI
reasoning in their politics. You hear the cops foster little comments.
For example, The C/O’s start calling our property shit.”Inventory this
shit” , “get your shit”, “here’s your shit”, and like monkeys, inmates
picked it up.”I’m waiting to get my shit” Stop thinking and talking like
the pigs! The C/O’s started calling a cell a house. ” go back to your
house”, “is this your house?” inmate monkeys,” in my house”…it’s not a
house! it’s a coffin! “Gassing” is another coin they want to circulate.
A little system of mnemonics that they propagate, which we swallow up!!!
In effect letting pigs create culture for us.
A prevalent concept i hear those going to SNY is “I want to back away
from the politics”… Like Cuban refugees who ask for political asylum,
but come to Miami and work with the CIA agents to overturn a political
movement. Like the bay of pigs. That is not “Apolitical” like they say.
Who cares what people say? Science is not about opinion and subjective
narratives, but observation, strict non-fiction. The drop out skinhead
relates that SNY’s are more violent than mainline now, and i agree!
Statistically SNY is one of the most violent of yards now. It wasn’t
always like that, and we can identify factor’s as to how this came
about. The DOC lowered its standard for letting people go to SNY. Before
you had to snitch, nowadays all you have to do is ask!! This is because
the DOC created a legal category of protected prisoners for its own
administrative convenience, but when challenged in court became more of
a burden than anything else. Opening up lawsuits and legal dilemmas…
They just opened the doors.
I want to caution righteous activists who hate snitch logic, to not
think of all PCs as weak cowards, some are, but know some PCs are very
dangerous! They do exercise routines also, and many pack heat
religiously as we do… Sammy “the rat” Grivano, was not a wimpy sissy at
all! but a determined fierce weasel, who killed more than anyone he
snitched on. Just like cops are not all fat pigs, some are committed
murderers. Like Johannes Mehserle, straight executioner! You have to be
like Karl Marx, who acknowledged the impressive violence of the
bourgeoisie, but qualified this violence with a philosophical analysis
of who it served, and what it meant for the workers of all nations,
never denying the inextricable link between thought and action - Theory
and Practice. Defining violence by its direction and and constitution.
MIM will help all of its students develop a deliberate super-structure,
not insulate concepts like the pigs! The pigs use slight of hand mind
control, MIM has criticism and demonstration instead of this. SNY’s need
to look hard at their own political line and ask whether or not they
push revolution, and what kind of revolution, and not act like rag dolls
caught in the currents of a river they chose to jump into. That’s real
politics not identity politics.
– a California Prisoner
D12 for MIM(prisons) responds:This comrade’s understanding
concerning the need to stay away from identity politics is good. It will
guard the movement, and prevent revisionism. This comrades reason for
seeing the SNY as only those who give 411 go to the SNY is not accurate.
The CDC has long held the policy to segregate prisoners from the general
population who have criminal records which would warrant their assault
on the general population, or due to the identity of the prisoner, i.e
pigs, k9s, and so forth. Due to the gang problem the CDC has had to
change its policy to allow former gang members who would be assaulted,
or killed if they remained on the general population, as well as
prisoners who enter the prison and face a choice of being forced into a
prison gang or to follow the underground rules set up by the prisoners.
The comrade states certain examples of cooperation between those engaged
in the unlawful market and the state, lets not forget that Lucky Luciano
aided the U.$. against fascist Italy. The main point that needs to be
remembered is that while these lumpen organizations have the greatest
potential for revolution in a parasitic imperialist country. They are
still lumpen, and have not shed their lumpen skin to stand with the
Third World proletariat as communists. The very nature of the lumpen is
predatory, not to the degree of the big imperialists, but they have a
lot of work to do. Many lumpen groups have revolutionary concepts as
their teachings, yet you still see them killing each other or
distributing drugs in to our neighborhood, robbing and stealing. It is
not surprising that many people join these lumpen organizations and are
let down, causing them to look for a way out.
History has shown that the revolutionary rhetoric espoused by the LOs
where brought in by those in the 60’s and 70’s who were involved in the
struggle for liberation. What we see is revolutionary nationalism within
the oppressed nations that are engaged in capital enterprise. We have to
recognize that it is the will of the state to play prisoner against
prisoner; to disrupt the educating and organizing of prisoners for
revolution. It’s the state that is ready to welcome prisoners and offer
them a “safe” place to do their time when the prisoner breaks a rule
that would warrant his assault or death from a lumpen organization. Or
to welcome those who no longer see any logic in participating in these
LOs due to political difference even when they tried to stay and
convince the others within their org. It is not MIM(Prisons) policy that
a prisoner should risk his safety when the prisoner doesn’t have to.
You’re more valuable alive, on the streets, and if in prison then you
should be able to move around and do political work. Engaging in
chauvinism and ultra-left behavior sets the movement back. While there
is a point when one should not cooperate with the state, we will not
encourage a persyn to stay in the SHU serving an indeterminate term,
when that persyn is a communist revolutionary and the tide is on his or
her shoulders. What matters is what one does as a communist
revolutionary. The line that one has will prove them to be for or
against the people. A friend or our enemy.
For years, MIM(Prisons) and others have agitated around the point that
people are getting indeterminate sentences in torture cells in
California based on things like birthday cards. Today, Sacramento
Prisoner Support made public some Freedom of Information Act documents
from the FBI showing that people on the outside can also be targeted for
who they send birthday cards to.
The gang investigation unit in California, IGI, has already made efforts
to identify people working with MIM(Prisons), so this is nothing new or
surprising. But we point to it to remind people of two lessons. First,
security is important at every stage and in everything you do when
dealing with the imperialist state because they are watching. Second,
when the FBI has to file a report every time comrades get a letter or
birthday card, that is resources being taken away from other
intelligence work. Some people view efforts developing better security
as taking away from “real” political work. But examples like this show
that security work in itself is a blow to imperialism by utilizing
resources that could be used against the Third World. Of course, anyone
who doesn’t take security seriously will never accomplish what we really
need to do to end oppression anyway.
[Editor’s Note: Before the public version of this self-criticism was
published, the NAMP comrade mentioned below denied most of the political
lines attributed to h herein. Since NAMP has made no official political
statements either way on these issues, the question of NAMP’s real line
is a mystery for now. We hope that they will print documents that
clarify their positions for future struggle.]
This self-criticism comes following the rectification of the relations
between MIM(Prisons) and the New Afrikan Maoist Party (NAMP) and its
associated organizations. After being assigned the role as the primary
contact for relations between MIM(Prisons) and other organizations, i
failed to correctly apply the Maoist theory of United Front in this
position. Here i will outline my mistakes and demonstrate why they
should not have happened.
Historical Background
NAMP predates MIM(Prisons), and both organizations came out of circles
working closely with the Maoist Internationalist Party - Amerika before
its disintegration. We were both focused on lumpen organizing within a
Maoist framework. Soon after forming, MIM(Prisons) took over “MIM
Distributors” and continued this institution by distributing MIM
literature through the Free Political Books to Prisoners Program that
MIM had led for many years. At the same time that we were developing
this transition of responsibilities, our comrades were in dialogue with
NAMP to help with the distribution of their journal that had been
launched earlier that year.
MIM Distributors became the main source of the NAMP’s Party
Bulletin. MIM(Prisons) dedicated its own resources to producing and
distributing these materials as a fraternal Maoist organization with
NAMP. On the whole, we uphold the Party Bulletin as correct and an
excellent starting point for a New Afrikan vanguard party. The Party
Bulletin even premiered some new political line on the lumpen in
the United $tates that MIM(Prisons) and others also uphold to this day.
As NAMP had established itself as a fraternal organization with a
correct line and practice, the responsibility of coordinating our work
together on behalf of MIM(Prisons) was put into my hands. By the time
the last issue of the Party Bulletin (issue 6) was put out, NAMP had
already launched a new mass organization called the New Afrikan Ujamaa
Dynasty. This organization was explicitly less radical than other groups
NAMP had attempted to launch under its umbrella, with a focus on their
strategy of developing ujamaa or “cooperative economics.” While we had
already struggled with NAMP over this strategy in the past, i did not
see this difference as a dividing line question.
The Party Bulletin ceased and after a period of “reorganization” NAMP’s
leadership came back to MIM(Prisons) with the Blueprint for Ujamaa
Dynasty asking for help with production and distribution. This was
part of a plan to expand and fund the work of NAMP and the New Afrikan
Liberation Movement in general. But it was more than a fund-raising
tactic, it was a strategic orientation that saw pushing the
contradictions between the New Afrikan national bourgeoisie and the
imperialists as principal. It is at this point where my practice began
to violate the Maoist line on United Front, not to mention our line on
the cell structure.
Fundraising: Strategy or Tactics?
Throughout our relationship with NAMP, i expressed disagreements with
their strategy based on building New Afrikan-owned businesses, but did
not want to impose unrealistic fundraising techniques on a fraternal
organization struggling to get going.
In 2002, MIM’s PIRAO Chief had already
dismissed
the strategy of developing bourgeois businesses with proletarian
politics, using lumpen and labor aristocrats from the imperialist
countries, as being an ultra-left strategy. A counter argument would
apply if comrades are unemployable. Having one’s own business would be a
good way to employ comrades with prison records, for example. Generally
though, we should be opportunistic in our fundraising and not get sucked
into life projects nor into risky get-rich-with-little-work schemes. The
Amerikan dream is an easy resource that we can tap for the movement with
minimal work and preparation.
Most New Afrikans are legally employed and are therefore labor
aristocracy/petty bourgeoisie. Compared to starting their own
businesses, they could do more for the struggle by being part-time cogs
in the imperialist country mall economy to raise funds for
anti-imperialist work. Ironically, NAMP lost the hypothetical
unemployable argument for building businesses when they more recently
switched their recruitment focus from the lumpen to the petty
bourgeoisie.
Strategy should stem from one’s political line. Therefore, when NAMP and
i (as representative of MIM(Prisons) ) agreed that we should not split
over strategic orientation i should have been pushing some of those
disagreements harder. To an extent they were correct to say we should
not split on strategy, particularly in a stage when we do not have a
centralized party as is currently the case. Different cells and
organizations will vary in their tasks and therefore in the strategies
to achieve those tasks. So the question should have been, do we agree
that the tasks that each other is taking on are worthwhile? Now it is
clear that we do not. If we had dug into these issues deeper at the
time, we could have avoided the confusion we have now created and the
setbacks we have caused both organizations.
No Neo-Colonialism
Part of this self-criticism is a criticism of the NAMP leader putting
forth a liquidationist line. In short, NAMP abandoned their focus on the
lumpen in favor of the petty bourgeoisie, who they said had the most
revolutionary potential. This was justified by an inappropriate
application of aspects of the theory of New Democracy to New Afrika.
While
Mao
used his theory of New Democracy to demonstrate the impotence of the
bourgeoisie as a revolutionary force in a semi-feudal exploited country
and the need for proletarian and peasant organizing, NAMP used it to
justify organizing primarily the petty/national bourgeoisie for their
own economic interests as a necessary precursor to a socialist
revolution. This is backwards, because even the impotent Chinese
bourgeoisie were economically hampered and oppressed to a degree that
New Afrika has not seen for at least 50 years, and Mao showed that they
could not be depended on as a progressive force due to imperialism’s
influence.
NAMP’s New Democracy line is an example of something that i didn’t
investigate enough and struggle with thoroughly. Others in MIM(Prisons)
have also been self-critical for not thoroughly investigating the line
of this material we distributed to the masses, due to laziness. To
approve these items for distribution by MIM Distributors, we should have
been as thorough as we are with an issue of Under Lock &
Key. Ultimately, it is not practical for one of us to serve as the
distributor for the other because NAMP and MIM(Prisons) are not in
democratic centralism with each other. With the movement decentralized
in a cell structure, we must each study and understand each others’ work
before distributing it. Being forced to do this, and the subsequent
learning process for all leaders that will occur, is a benefit of the
cell structure in a period where theory is a big focus.
At MIM’s 1998 Congress they defined the “No Neo-Colonialism” point of
their
United
Front policy by saying, “Always keep the perspective of the
international proletariat and do not use the United Front as an occasion
to cut ‘a special deal’ for one oppressed nation.” Siphoning resources
from MIM(Prisons) to NAMP effectively cut short the internationalist
struggle in favor of one nation’s struggle under a leadership that was
openly organizing for the economic interests of those benefiting from
the super-profits from Third World nations around the world! The open
focus on the petty bourgeoisie happened late in the game, but it was the
logical conclusion of the “cooperative economics” strategy and “New
Democratic” struggle with no proletarian leadership.
The limited size and influence of our organizations makes the claim of
neo-colonialism seem a little disproportionate to reality. But that just
shows how narrow my view was to take resources for the internationalist
struggle and funnel them into this very small operation, on the premise
that it represented the New Afrikan struggle for self-determination.
No Pimping
“The most backward masses should be able to see what the difference is
between us and our allies, except for fraternal parties on issues that
are not the third cardinal [the labor aristocracy question –ed.].” -
MIM’s 1998 Congress resolution on policy for building the United Front
One thing that NAMP’s work demonstrated was the appeal of nation-based
organizing. While NAMP was pushing essentially the same political line
in the Party Bulletin as MIM had put forth, often printing MIM articles,
they attracted recruits that MIM did not. This small confirmation of the
correctness of single-nation parties reinforced the importance of
building NAMP to me.
It was a combination of attempting non-interference and of trusting a
long-time comrade that led me to support Ujamaa as we had supported
NAMP. While MIM(Prisons) did not officially run the Ujamaa, it was
associated with MIM(Prisons) in a way that i saw as validating our
correctness to the masses. Here was another mass organization coming
from the lumpen that was part of the MIM camp. Like NAMP, the Ujamaa
recruited people who then read MIM literature, which was also a material
benefit of keeping the Ujamaa around. This was opportunism, linked to
sectarianism, or putting the organization first as opposed to the
struggle and the correct line to push the struggle further. As a result
we confused the masses about what the best line and practice was.
For a Maoist organization to provide resources for a mass organization
that it leads, particularly in its early stages, is completely
legitimate according to Maoist theory. For NAMP to fund Ujamaa work is
one thing, since NAMP controlled Ujamaa. For MIM(Prisons) to provide
labor, supplies and funds to promote the Ujamaa was incorrect.
A correct practice was to print an
interview
with the Ujamaa in Under Lock & Key, i.e. within the
context of our own Maoist newsletter. To co-publish materials with other
mass organizations is completely within the realm of United Front work
as long as we are able to assert our political line and criticize our
comrades when necessary.
Hard Bargains
Another lesson to take from this is that any material/financial exchange
for work should be strictly accounted for between the parties as well as
with the central leadership. It is ultra-left to assume relationships
under capitalism can exist in an amorphous mutually beneficial way.
Acquiring material wealth is THE goal under capitalism, and it will take
many generations of socialism before this will cease to be true. That’s
not to say that people can’t act outside their material interests under
capitalism, but instead to put a realistic standard on how relationships
should be structured at this time to avoid problems.
As NAMP effectively liquidated itself into the Ujamaa, they went as far
as to imply that MIM(Prisons) should do the same. But it was only after
MIM(Prisons) work continued to expand and a long period of conflict
between my efforts to support the Ujamaa and our own work that i
seriously considered breaking our relationship with NAMP. Harder
bargaining wouldn’t have corrected the situation, but it would have
reduced the setbacks to MIM(Prisons) work and the false expectations
developed within the Ujamaa of our relationship.
It was a liberal approach that led me to continue siphoning
MIM(Prisons)‘s resources to NAMP/Ujamaa for so long. I saw our
relationship as a binding contract, and i saw breaking it as going back
on my word. This was an incorrect view of the situation, since MIM
Distributors agreed to distribute NAMP material only by virtue of it
being fraternal, Maoist literature. Because NAMP was leading the Ujamaa
work does not mean that we should honor that relationship; that is a
bourgeois approach. This was my biggest error: that i didn’t say ’no’ to
working on the Ujamaa because it is not a Maoist organization.
Another way i looked at it is that NAMP was working hard and in the
middle of a lot of things that i could sabotage if i just cut the rug
from under them. But again, neither of us should have gotten in this
position in the first place. NAMP cannot be an independent organization
if MIM(Prisons) has the ability to do that to them. This is important to
realize in a time when the movement is made of many small, independent
groups who are trying to figure out how we can support each others’
work.
No Liquidationism
When the Blueprint for Ujamaa Dynasty came out, a couple of comrades
within MIM(Prisons) brought significant criticisms of the line presented
in it and asked why we were distributing it. I justified it by saying it
was only a mass organization and need not be held to the same standards.
While i was privately criticizing and debating NAMP, i essentially
silenced the Maoist critiques of the Ujamaa with my line that these
criticisms were too harsh for a mass organization that we were
effectively bankrolling.
There is one simple rule that should have prevented my errors and it is
not new to me. That rule is that Maoists do not distribute materials
that we do not agree with without criticizing it or providing our own
line in conjunction with it. Reading
MIM
Theory 14 on United Front helped me fully realize the mistakes that
i made, and i recommend that it be studied thoroughly by all
revolutionaries as a crucial component of building an effective
anti-imperialist movement. I don’t think i will make the same mistake
again, but there is no excuse for making it this time, when i had
already studied United Front theory.
In the end, both MIM(Prisons) and NAMP have suffered from my mistakes
and the mistakes of others in both organizations. The masses have
suffered because an organization they look to for leadership has
confused things for them. This is not to condemn mass organizations like
the Ujamaa, or even the Ujamaa itself, which has taken aim at many of
the pressing problems of New Afrikans. But we are seriously criticizing
its leadership to the extent that it overlaps with NAMP. For those who
see the system for what it is and hold no illusions or attachments to
it, we should expect much more than petty bourgeois business development
built on super-profits from the Third World. For me to treat work for
Ujamaa as equal to work for MIM(Prisons) was a disservice to the pushing
forward of the struggle and promoting the most correct line needed to do
that. This is the same error that NAMP has made (to a greater degree) by
liquidating itself into the Ujamaa.
MIM(Prisons) held our first official congress in July of 2010 to clarify
our priorities, renew our common commitment, and push our work forward.
We reviewed work in key areas, discussed successes and failures and
debated resolutions on new directions for the coming year. For the most
part this congress focused on strategic and tactical priorities and the
best way to advance our work. But these priorities are based in
political line, and discussions of that line and the priorities it
requires were a key component of the congress. Proposals related to new
political line were also raised and those that were controversial were
put on the table for study and debate in future discussions.
Distribution
The production and distribution of revolutionary materials to a
potentially revolutionary class that is systematically denied
educational materials is central to our work as a cell. Keeping
Under Lock & Key as a regular publication reaching U.$.
prisoners and maintaining other correspondence with prisoners topped our
list of priorities. We also gave relatively high priority to our
website, the second major leg of our distribution work.
Despite a number of small improvements and a consistent publication
schedule, our distribution of Under Lock & Key slightly
declined over the last year and a half. While the production and quality
of ULK falls in our lap, we see its expansion as a
responsibility falling largely on United Struggle from Within (USW). We
encourage other comrades to make pledges to increase our subscribers
behind bars as
our
comrade in the Black Order Revolutionary Organization has.
In order to reduce costs we have changed our policies so that new
subscribers only get our introductory letter and one issue of
ULK. To get more than that you must write us again confirming
receipt or censorship of those items. Similarly, we are requiring our
regular subscribers to tell us exactly what mail they have received, and
when, each time they write us. If we can’t confirm you are receiving our
mail we will stop sending it. By saving costs where we cannot confirm
our effectiveness we will be able to expand our distribution to a larger
subscriber base.
Over the last couple years we have seen a steady increase in the number
of letters we have sent to prisoners. This is indicative of the
expansion of our various smaller projects (other than ULK) with
prisoners who are active participants in the movement. While readership
online may be comparable (based on our limited statistics), the amount
of work we see being done per reader from our paper literature is far
greater.
Worldwide Web
Adding the
etext.org
MIM archive to our website greatly increased our content and
eventually led to serious increases in readers. Yet we are still only
getting around a sixth as many page views as they were getting
in
2002. MIM had the most widely read Amerikan, self-described
communist website at that time. This goes to show the damage done by
political repression and privatization of the worldwide web.
Original content that MIM(Prisons) has added to the web that attracts
the most attention is our censorship work and other services we provide
to prisoners and their supporters. Many of our readers are utilizing our
information to maintain better communication with their loved ones and
to try to get information on what’s going on behind closed doors and
barbed wire fences.
Items that are in demand that we need to improve are Spanish language
material, artwork and cutting edge cultural reviews. We are dedicated to
making all three more prominent on our website, but we need help from
our comrades to keep producing great anti-imperialist art, to provide
insightful reviews of movies and music that our readers might be
interested in and to translate and edit materials into Spanish. Online
readers will see improvements to the site in coming months.
While many are following the corporate bandwagons of Facebook and
Twitter, we are interested in recent battles over net neutrality (the
premise that the interests of the powerful can’t allow certain online
content to get priority access to the public). Some have a theory of
putting technology in command and worshipping the oppressors’
institutions and petty bourgeois trends, rather than building
independent institutions of the oppressed with politics in command. As
examples, Facebook, Twitter and Google all have direct relationships
with the state department. How could these ever become serious tools for
revolution? The real question is, how can we build serious tools for
revolution in cyberspace?
Censorship
Distribution of literature to prisoners comes with the ongoing problem
of censorship faced by MIM(Prisons) and our comrades behind bars. Our
annual
censorship report details the changes and accomplishments of the
past year.
Most of the prisoners on the ULK mailing list are not letting
us know what mail they receive from us, making censorship very difficult
to track. It’s possible the mail is not getting through but it’s just as
likely that these subscribers are just not telling us about what they
got. We also have a lot of prisoners write once and then never write
again. To better focus where we spend money, and to improve our tracking
of censorship, we are changing our policies as described above.
Correspondence
In the first six months of 2010 about a third of our mail came from
repeat writers - prisoners who are in relatively regular contact. This
is an increase from 2009, and we should push to continue to increase
this percentage. While it is great that we get so much interest from new
comrades, it is important that we engage our regular contacts in study
and work. We recognize that as long as our materials are being read and,
even better, shared then we are accomplishing our goal of building
public opinion. Yet, while most subscribers may be passive learners at
this stage, we see our task as a cell as facilitating the organization
of prisoners, including the development of cadre level skills. Several
specific congress proposals related to this work were passed and we hope
to see increased engagement from our newer comrades behind bars in the
coming year.
A key element of raising the level of political understanding and
providing study opportunities to our comrades behind bars is the
MIM(Prisons)-led introductory study group. This study group gains a lot
of interest but for both logistical difficulties (censorship, moving,
lack of stamps) as well as loss of political interest, we see a steep
decline in participants over the course of each study session. To
provide more frequent opportunities for study to new folks, and as a
pre-requisite to the more serious introductory study group, MIM(Prisons)
will start all new comrades in a shorter introduction study group (Intro
Level 1) which will last two sessions and run approximately every 3
months. Successful completion of this study group will be required for
admission into the more comprehensive, year-long Intro Level 2 class.
United Struggle from Within (USW)
United Struggle from Within (USW) is a MIM(Prisons)-led mass
organization for U.$. prisoners. USW is explicitly anti-imperialist in
leading campaigns on behalf of U.$. prisoners in alliance with national
liberation struggles in North America and around the world.
This year, MIM(Prisons) opened a separate forum for USW leaders to
develop the organization and strategize on campaigns. This was a step
forward in the re-establishment of USW as an independent organization
(following the dissolution of the Maoist Internationalist Party -
Amerika). The campaigns leaders develop will be advertised in each issue
of ULK for rank-and-file USW comrades to keep abreast of
progress and how to get involved. If necessary, MIM(Prisons) will send
out notices to affected comrades regarding campaigns that are moving at
a pace that is too fast for ULK. Comrades who want to receive
such notices need to write to MIM(Prisons) to join USW.
The campaign to get grievances heard in California is one campaign that
is resonating loudly, both there and in other states that have adopted
similar campaigns. This is a great example of a campaign that was
initiated by USW and promoted through regular articles in ULK.
We believe that those in charge of prisoners should be held to the
highest standards of conduct, as was done in socialist China, because of
the extreme amount of power they have over other people. In contrast to
socialist prisons and work camps in China, abuse is a daily occurrence
in U.$. prisons. Therefore the grievance struggle is strategically
correct in that it gives the state a chance to clearly take a position
for or against this rampant abuse, which informs the prison masses as to
what forms of struggle are necessary to achieve humane conditions.
Also related to USW, there is a ULK writing group, which is
open to comrades who have completed the introductory study courses and
are involved in writing projects with MIM(Prisons). At the congress we
affirmed our commitment that USW should be producing short summary
articles for Under Lock & Key reflecting struggles within
the ULK writing group. Comrades have already seen the ideas
from the study group reflected in the pages of ULK over the
last year.
Prisoner Legal Clinic
MIM(Prisons) rarely has access to legal advice from experienced lawyers
on the outside. In 2009 the Prisoner Legal Clinic (PLC) was formalized
as another facet of USW for prisoners interested or experienced in legal
issues. The basic goals of the PLC are to push our anti-censorship and
anti-repression work forward, while also offering members a space to
discuss specifics of their legal work. Members of the PLC write legal
articles for ULK and contributed greatly to the
legal strategy issue
of ULK, issue 13.
If you are an active member of the PLC, you should expect an updated
letter from us two or three times per year detailing our current
projects and comrades’ questions/suggestions. Members of the PLC should
also be contributing legal articles for ULK.
Release Program
At our congress, MIM(Prisons) reaffirmed our commitment to the Prisoner
Re-Lease on Life Program. We recognize that our resources to advance
this program are limited, and we have learned some valuable lessons over
the past year through our work with released prisoners. We need to work
more aggressively with prisoners scheduled to get out within a year,
making it clear what resources are available and helping them do the
research necessary to hit the streets as safely as possible. Prisoners
with upcoming releases should contact our newly appointed release
coordinator for more info.
United Front for Peace in Prisons
MIM(Prisons) is working on a United Front for Peace in Prisons with
leaders of a number of progressive-minded organizations behind bars. The
principal contradiction facing the imprisoned lumpen today is the
prisoner-on-prisoner violence and conflicts that prevent any progressive
work from happening. The United Front project is developing a statement
of unity that groups and individuals can sign to join. This statement
has been in progress for a long time, partly because we are trying to
develop unity with a number of groups before we finalize it. If you are
involved in any kind of peace or unity project where you are, please get
in touch so that you can have input on this very important project.
Related work with a number of more advanced organizations will also
result in the production of a book on the lumpen within the United
$tates. Over the next year MIM(Prisons) will be printing draft chapters
of this book to be distributed as pamphlets for comment from lumpen
organizations and fraternal groups. The feedback will be incorporated
into the final printing of the book which is targeted for 2011.
This book will advance our analysis of the class and national
contradictions in the belly of the beast and how we can best utilize
them in the interests of the oppressed masses of the world. It will
serve as a survival guide for the lumpen, recognizing the necessity of
internationalism to overcome the number one enemy of humynity:
imperialism.
Conclusion
MIM(Prisons) plans to hold congress annually and we welcome submissions
of proposals for new areas of priority as well as new political line
from our comrades in United Struggle from Within and other United Front
organizations. We also look forward to feedback on our work over the
coming year so that we can continually improve and advance the struggle.
Typical Amerikan homes provide luxury most people can only dream of,
while home values far above the actual cost of materials and labor lace
the owners’ pockets with super-profits.
United Front is the theory of uniting different groups across
class lines for a common goal or interest, while maintaining
independence where those groups disagree. The application of united
front theory is about recognizing different contradictions in society
and utilizing them in the interests of the international proletariat.
The primary united front is the Anti-Imperialist United Front, which is
made up of the majority of the world’s people whose material interests
lie in defeating imperialism. This is a strategic united front based on
the principal contradiction.
In this article we will address a couple of contemporary issues in the
United $tates and analyze their potential for united front work. We’ll
see that many of the big conflicts in a First World country are between
the enemy classes, but that does not always mean we sit on the
sidelines. Some forms of united front are tactical and require fast
action based on thorough knowledge. To successfully navigate the
potential for united front in the First World that serves the interests
of the Third World proletariat we must first have a correct analysis of
our conditions. The first section of this article provides a quick
background to get us started.
Land, Housing and the Settler Nation
One of the arguments made against the labor aristocracy thesis is that
corporations have no interest in sacrificing profit to pay First World
workers more, and there is no corporate conspiracy to enforce such a
policy. This is based in the theory of free market capitalism, or only
reading the beginning chapters of Marx’s Capital and treating
that as an accurate model of reality in all places for all time. As a
class, capitalists do depend on the labor aristocracy, not just
politically, but economically as consumers and cogs in their growing
pyramid scheme of finance capital. And there is at least one place where
the U.$. imperialists can exert their will as a class (more and more
these days) - it’s called the U.$. government. The promotion of home
ownership by the feds is one of the biggest examples of the imperialists
consciously building a labor aristocracy within the heart of the empire.
Home ownership has been a staple of Amerikan wealth since the settlers
stole this land from the First Nations and built their homesteads on it.
The net worth of Amerikan families compared to First Nations and those
descended from slaves in the U.$. is one legacy of this form of
primitive accumulation. While land ownership among the earliest European
invaders was 100% (that’s why they came to the Americas), by the 1775
War of Independence, land ownership was still at 70% for the
Euro-Amerikan nation.(1) Arghiri Emmanuel pointed out that Amerikan
wages were able to stay so high in this early period of capitalist
development, even as land ownership ceased to be universal, because the
abundant “free” land stolen from the First Nations provided a fallback
plan for European settlers.(2) This primitive accumulation through
genocide was the basis for wealth that the Amerikan labor aristocracy
enjoyed as industrialization transformed more of the settlers into wage
laborers.
Following the inter-imperialist struggles of WWI, the United $tates
became the dominant imperialist power. The influx of wealth that came
with this allowed for the integration of southern and eastern European
immigrants into the white nation leading up to the Great Depression.(1)
From 1900 to 1950, home ownership rates in the United $tates averaged
about 45%, with the lowest rates in the Black Belt South and the highest
in European dominated northwest states.(3) After the economic recovery
that came with the spoils of WWII, the United $tates embarked on the
suburbanization of Amerika with numerous incentives from the federal
government to bring home ownership above 60% again.
Since 1960, home ownership has stayed above 60% for U.$. citizens as a
whole.(4) This rate was above 70% for white Amerikans in recent years,
but the census does not have comparable statistics by race going back
very far. Blacks and Latinos are just under 50% for rates of home
ownership, even though national oppression has ensured that they
currently face foreclosure disproportionately.
Emmanuel’s theories in Unequal Exchange demonstrate how the
significantly higher incomes of people in the First World actually
transfer wealth to the imperialist countries from the Third World,
reinforcing their economic advantage. Similarly, the oppressor nation
has equity and is able to increase wealth in ways that the internal
semi-colonies have not been able to do despite access to exploiter level
jobs. All of this fits with the general trend of capitalism, which is
the accumulation of capital. The more you have, the more you tend to
get.
Collapse of the U.$. Housing Market
The left wing of white nationalism (whether self-described anarchists,
socialists, Maoists or Democrats) has been saying that the increase in
home foreclosures is an indication of the heightening contradictions
between the Amerikan proletariat and the capitalists. These people
defend the stolen land that was the foundation of wealth for settler
Amerika, and the modern home ownership pyramid scheme that is the
foundation of the Amerikan dream today.
Not only have millions of people lost their homes to foreclosure in
recent years, but fear-mongers point out that the “2008 sub-prime
mortgage market resulted in the disappearance of $13 trillion in
American household wealth between mid-2007 and March 2009… on average,
U.S. households lost one quarter of their wealth in that period.”(5)
Such alarmists ignore that Amerikans gained $10 trillion from 2006 to
2007 to reach an all-time high, and that net worth of the country’s
citizens has generally gone up at increasing rates since WWII.(6) The
bigger ups and downs in all financial markets are certainly signs of
crisis, but to act like Amerikans are being sunk to Third World
conditions in 2010 is ludicrous. If only these activists would cry so
loud for those who really have had to live in Third World conditions for
their whole lives and for generations!
Most, if not all, of the loss in Amerikans’ net worth is accounted for
by stock portfolios and values of homes (which are bought and sold like
stocks these days); in other words losses in finance capital.
Traditionally, the petty bourgeoisie in Marxism was not exploited, nor
did it significantly exploit others. To claim that those who reap
profits from investments of finance capital are anything less than petty
bourgeoisie is a rejection of Marxist definitions. With home ownership
around 68% in recent years, that is a solid two thirds of people in the
United $tates who fall squarely into the category of petty bourgeoisie
or higher, including 50% of Blacks and Latinos (minimum). This group is
210 million people, or only 3% of the world’s population in 2010, yet
they hold more net wealth than the total market capitalization of all
publicly traded companies in the world.(7)
Our critics point to the great wealth inequalities within the United
$tates as reason to organize Amerikans for revolution. So let’s just
look at the bottom 80% of Amerikans, who owned 15% (a mere scrap from
the table if you will) of the net wealth in the United $tates in 2007
(and this was a 15-year low for them).(8) While their share has
decreased a few percentage points since 1983, total net worth in the
United $tates has increased by almost 5 times. Therefore the lowest 80%
of Amerikans went from about $2.2 trillion in net worth in 1983 to
almost $10 trillion in 2007. (Two trillion dollars could eliminate world
hunger for the next 66 years, until 2076.(9)) “Middle class” Amerika has
assets that are greater than the GDP of China,(10) the world’s
industrial powerhouse representing about 20% of the world’s population.
That’s comparing just the Amerikan “middle class” and “poor” to the
whole nation of China, including its well-developed capitalist class.
Since the proletariat, by definition, has negligible net worth in the
form of assets, let’s look at their income.(11) Income generally
increases proportionately with net worth across the globe.(12) Almost
half of the world’s population lives on less than $1000 per year. That
is 3.14 billion people living on less than $3 trillion in a year.(13)
Now before we condemn Amerikans’ huge assets, let’s make sure that they
just aren’t better at saving and investing their money than the
proletariat. In 2005, the wealthiest 20% of the world accounted for
76.6% of total private consumption. The poorest fifty percent accounted
for only 7.2% of consumption.(13) A conservative estimate leaves us with
Amerikans, on average, consuming at least 27 times the average persyn in
the poorest half of the world.(14) So money management skills cannot
explain Amerika’s huge net worth.
A just, sustainable humyn society requires the Amerikan labor
aristocracy to be brought down to consumer levels much closer to the
Third World. But this little exercise demonstrates that this is far from
happening, despite the alarmists’ cries.
Ultimately, the contradiction we’re describing is between the labor
aristocracy and the imperialists. The imperialists, in particular
finance capital, are a dynamic, opportunist class. In contrast, the
labor aristocracy benefits from stability of the status quo. The finance
capitalists were able to make quick profits by selling the labor
aristocracy short, so Amerikans are pissed. While perhaps pushing the
labor aristocracy towards fascism, the finance capitalists are also
undercutting the consumerism of Amerikans that their system depends on
so much. What we are witnessing is an internal contradiction in the
imperialist system playing out. Both groups control trillions of dollars
in super-profits from the Third World, and the Anti-Imperialist United
Front has no interest in one of them getting more than the other. We
need to keep sitting this one out.
Migration to the United $tates
As discussed above, high wages and ballooning housing values reinforce
themselves in our current economic system, making the rich richer.
However, neither could be maintained without erecting a border outside
of which these two things cannot flow. Therefore, keeping wages and
housing values high is directly linked to the battle over increasing
repression of migrant laborers within U.$. borders. The contradiction in
this struggle is between oppressed nations who are trying to gain access
to jobs in the United $tates and the oppressor nation that is trying to
keep them out. This challenge to imperialist country privilege indicates
that the battle for migrant rights is part of the anti-imperialist
struggle.
While Third World people and some Amerikan youth faced Amerikan labor
aristocrats on the streets, it was the U.$. District Court that put in
place an injunction on most of the provisions of Arizona’s Senate Bill
1070 (SB1070), in light of a lawsuit filed by the U.$. Department of
Justice (DOJ) against the state of Arizona. The DOJ held that
immigration was under federal jurisdiction, and that they had a plan for
the whole country to balance its various interests related to
immigration that Arizona would not be allowed to mess up.
The interest of the bourgeois internationalists is in having free access
to markets and labor, not to mention international relations. This camp
includes the federal government and their finance capitalist backers as
well as smaller businesses that only operate in the United $tates, but
depend on migrant labor. Their conflict is with other bourgeois
interests and the bourgeoisified majority of Amerikans whose position of
privilege stems from the elitism of who is allowed to enter their
fortress of jewels.
There is effectively a united front between the internationalism of the
mass resistance to SB1070 on both sides of the Mexican border and the
U.$. government acting on behalf of bourgeois internationalism. And for
now, it is the imperialists who are really throwing a wrench in the
works for Amerikans, even though the contradiction at its base is
between oppressed nations and the oppressor nation.
A majority of Amerikans in a number of polls supported SB1070 or a
similar law. The highest percentage listed in one article, 79%, did not
agree that “illegal aliens are entitled to the same rights and basic
freedoms as U.S. citizens.”(15) This is the definition of Amerikan
chauvinism. At best, one fifth of U.$. citizens don’t think they deserve
more than other humyn beings by virtue of being born in the United
$tates. This is why we even keep an eye on the imperialists for glimmers
of internationalism in the First World.
With Latinos, we can see how quickly this consciousness develops by
tracking the percentage of coconuts in the population over time. A
Latino Decisions poll found that 12% of second-generation
Latino voters in Arizona supported SB1070. By the fourth generation it
had increased to 30% supporting the coconut position.(16) Amerikanism is
an insidious disease that has claimed significant portions of the
internal semi-colonies of the United $tates.
Unite All Who Can Be United
While many dogmatists still criticize Mao for allying the Chinese
Communists with the national bourgeoisie, we can take united front
theory even further and come up with examples of progressive forces
allying with the government of the imperialist superpower of the world
against an oppressor nation. This goes to show that we cannot let
ultra-left ideas of purity prevent us from allying with those who might
help our cause.
The rightist errors in applying united front theory happen when we have
incorrect lines elsewhere. Not recognizing a united front as working
with an enemy class, or becoming convinced that other contradictions
have been resolved, and not just pushed to a secondary position, are the
main forms of rightism to guard against. Mao had to fight much rightism
from other communists who thought the communists and national bourgeois
forces should merge into one, where inevitably the reactionary
bourgeoisie would lead because of their relative power. Rightism in the
United $tates looks like people getting caught up with legislative
battles over migrant rights. Without national liberation, there is no
freedom for oppressed nations under imperialism. The imperialists will
always oppose that, just as the Nationalists fought the Communists in
civil war once the Japanese were forced out.
We do not seek unity for the sake of unity. We seek unity that utilizes
all the forces possible to tackle the principal contradiction, or
battles that push the principal contradiction forward. When we find
strategic unity with others, the united front also provides a basis for
unity-criticism-unity, which advances the struggle and deepens the unity
of revolutionaries and all oppressed people for a better future.
This
Report is an analysis of the censorship experienced by MIM(Prisons) from
July 2009 through June 2010. In January 2008, MIM(Prisons) released our
first censorship
report, documenting what we can and can’t get into which prisons.
Last year we decided it would be best to analyze our censorship status
annually instead of biannually because it often takes months to
determine the status of a piece of mail.
To compile this data we rely solely on censored mail that is returned to
us by mailroom staff and reports from prisoners themselves. From July
2009 to June 2010, we sent in five digits worth of mail, of which 83%
were unconfirmed as received or censored. In the last reporting period,
only 80% of the mail was unconfirmed. This trend shows us that even less
people are reporting what mail they’ve gotten from us than last year,
which makes drawing conclusions from our records nearly impossible. For
example, when reading the state-by-state chart, it is important to
remember that “no censorship reported” does not mean that all the mail
got in, just that we don’t know what happened. Some states with no
censorship reported were: Colorado were 96% of the mail was unconfirmed;
in Indiana 92%; in Mississippi 93%, and in Nebraska and New Hampshire,
100% of the mail was unreported.
This lack of data continues despite the fact that every issue of
Under Lock & Key and many of our letters request that
subscribers tell us what they receive from us and when each time they
write. At our congress this summer we voted to adjust our policies to
require subscribers to notify us of their mail status in order to stay
on our mailing list. We have started sending comrades we are in
correspondence with Unconfirmed Mail Forms that will list what mail we
have sent them that we do not know the status of to encourage reporting.
But even if you don’t receive one of these forms, you should still let
us know what you get from MIM Distributors or MIM(Prisons). In fact, if
you tell us what you get from us before we send out the form you’ll save
us printing and postage costs!
Across the country, it appears that our censorship is gradually
decreasing. However, if we aren’t facing state repression, then we’re
probably doing something wrong politically. For this reason, we don’t
expect to ever be completely free of censorship while the United $tates
is still an imperialist state. We attribute these decreases to the hard
work our comrades inside have been doing to file appeals when their mail
gets censored. Another reason it may appear that our censorship status
is decreasing is our incomplete data – there may be censorship in places
that we just don’t know about.
Prisoners’ Legal Clinic
In the last year we started coordinating our legal efforts in a more
structured way with comrades inside through the MIM(Prisons)-led
Prisoners’ Legal Clinic. Members of the PLC have edited and added to the
Censorship Guide that we send to prisoners who have had our lit
censored; shared info and analysis about important legal issues relating
to our anti-imperialist, anti-capitalist work of fighting censorship and
political repression; and contributed several articles to the legal
strategy issue of
ULK issue
13. In this reporting year, we doubled the amount of Censorship
Guides we sent out in the previous reporting year, so the help we’ve
gotten on this guide is invaluable. We hope the PLC will eventually
expand to offer counseling and preparation assistance to comrades filing
anti-censorship lawsuits in the next year.
The PLC is facilitated by MIM(Prisons) but it is only as useful as the
comrades who are contributing to it from the inside. Anyone who wants to
engage in this important work should hook up with the PLC via
MIM(Prisons); no experience necessary.
Grieving Censorship is Crucial
At Menard Correctional Center in Menard, Illinois, Under Lock &
Key issue 9 was censored from dozens of comrades because of alleged
“STG references and depictions of violence.” A prisoner filed a
grievance, and Central Review in Springfield approved ULK 9 for
entry into Menard CC. We only received confirmation from this one
prisoner that he received the newsletter, so it is possible that Central
Review only permitted it to him. That is one example of why it is so
important to file grievances about censorship.
California Ban
In November 2009 we reported that the ban of literature from the Maoist
Internationalist Movement was lifted in a settlement between Prison
Legal News and CDCR. Even after this settlement, High Desert State
Prison and Pelican Bay State Prison still returned or trashed all mail
from MIM Distributors. Finally, in April 2010, High Desert Warden Mike
D. McDonald assured us that ULK would be reviewed on an
issue-by-issue basis instead of being automatically rejected based
solely on the return address. We recently sent out issue 14 and it got
in to at least some prisoners without a hitch. No such luck in Pelican
Bay where even a letter saying “Hi, how’s it going?” is still illegally
returned to sender uninspected. The San Francisco Bay View
newspaper and Revolution (by the rcp=u$a) have complained of
similar problems with their publications.
Feds Use Censorship to Make Room for Infiltrators
At the United Snakes Penitentiary - MAX in Florence, Colorado, ULK
issue 13 was censored because it contains the article “Security in
the Prison Movement” that is MIM(Prisons)’s analysis of how we should
deal with potential infiltrators, agent provocateurs, and snitches in
the movement. Our advice was basically to treat everyone as a potential
pig, and only give out information on a need-to-know basis. We also
defended our work with prisoners on Sensitive Needs Yards and Protective
Custody for similar reasons. While such prisoners are often viewed as
working with the state, we pointed out that many comrades have had to
leave their LOs for SNY in order to stop working for
the state.
The state sees this perspective as a threat to the security of the
institution (of white supremacy, no doubt). The reason given by the USP
mailroom staff for its censorship is that “p. 6 and 11 discuss what to
do with potential infiltrators who join the movement, not suitable for a
prison environment.” We wonder who they are targeting in our circle in
USP Florence, that it would blow their cover to share this advice with
them. The answer is probably everyone.
This report was written by our legal coordinator who took over the
job shortly before our last yearly report. While building on previous
work, s/he is responsible for many of the advances we made this year.
Fighting censorship is central to our work with the imprisoned lumpen
population in the United $tates and we always have projects for
volunteer lawyers and legal assistants. The easiest thing our
subscribers can do to help us out is tell us exactly what mail you have
received from us and when, each time you write.
Sequel to Toy Story 1 and 2, this movie starts off
with Andy, the boy who owns the toys featured in the movie, heading off
to college and packing up his stuff. His toys are long forgotten in a
trunk and are feeling forlorn about being abandoned. The toys end up
being donated to a daycare, but not without much whining about the
importance of loyalty to their original owner. Woody, the apparent hero
of the movie, is an especially strong advocate of devotion to their one
and only owner, even in the face of the logical argument that Andy has
grown up and has no need for them any longer and so they should hope to
move on to new kids.
We’re not looking to liberate the toys of the world, but this movie has
some insidious messages for both kids and adults. First there’s this
theme of loyalty to one owner, a message that is repeated later at the
daycare center by the toys that have become evil dictators because they
felt abandoned by their owners. This is a good subtle way of encouraging
kids not to question the status quo or try to make change independently.
Sure it didn’t work out for the bad toys, but loyalty paid off for the
good toys who end up in a good home in the end, with the blessing of
their original owner.
Toy Story 3 does hammer home the point that it’s not good to
have evil dictators in charge. The Ken doll makes a little speech about
how everyone should be treated equally to underscore that message. But
this message is so blunt it’s hard to see how anyone would really learn
anything from it. And although the good toys work together against the
evil dictator, they don’t do any work among the masses of other
oppressed toys to try to rally them to help. It was just a few focoist
heroes, out to save themselves, who accidentally overthrew the evil
dictator in their attempts to escape a bad situation. So the writers
pass up an opportunity to promote organizing the people against the
power structure in favor of focoist hero worship.
The one correct message in Toy Story 3 comes when the evil
dictator toy and the good toys end up in the trash burning machine and
they are all about to die. The good toys try to work with the evil
dictator bear to save themselves and him, and he abuses their trust to
save just himself. This is a lesson we can apply to the imperialists who
will never give up their power peacefully and work with the people for
the common good.
The last thing worth commenting on in this movie is the reinforcement of
patriarchal gender roles. The two main female characters are Barbie
(playing, well, a barbie doll who spends most of her time working on her
relationship with Ken) and Jessie, who’s a bit of a tom boy who at least
gets to go along on adventures with Woody, but who is very much taken in
by the romancing of a Spanish-speaking Buzz Lightyear. So basically the
focus of the plot involving the two main female characters is romance.
There is some mild mocking of gender roles around the Ken doll who has
way more outfits than, it is implied, a normal man might have. But the
implication seems to be that he’s a toy more fit to be played with by a
girl than a boy. Nothing very progressive.
Overall MIM(Prisons) would recommend this movie to supporters of the
patriarchy and the imperialist system. It would be useful for training
their children in some of the norms of the oppressive world that they
love.
On July 9 at around 2:30 p.m. the announcement was made that the
official verdict on the trial of Johannes Mehserle, the transit pig who
shot Oscar Grant in the back and killed him, would be released that day,
and immediately people started gathering at the major intersection of
14th and Broadway in downtown Oakland, California. At about 4:15 p.m.,
the verdict of involuntary manslaughter was released. This is the lowest
charge that the jury could have chosen to give Mehserle, and as
expected, the people of Oakland were pissed. Our comrades attended the
protest, equipped with fliers emphasizing that the movement needs to be
elevated from rioting into conscious revolutionary struggle generally,
and national liberation struggles specifically, if people want to stop
the murders of more Oscar Grants. The flier suggested Frantz Fanon’s
The Wretched of the Earth and
Black
Panther Party original documents as good starting points for a
successful transition into a movement to truly end police brutality.
Government employees in the downtown area were under a mandatory
evacuation, and business people were high-tailing it out of there as
fast as the freeways could take them. The state and the media had hyped
it up to be L.A. in 1992. That was far from the case. Still many large
buildings were boarded up 20 feet high for days; others were frantically
drilling in plywood as protesters converged. The hype was so extreme
that even one discount grocery store located a mile from the epicenter
of the protest boarded its windows as soon as the jury went into
deliberation - as if a crazed mob would travel so far to loot their
expired yogurt.
The City of Oakland set up a sound system in front of Town Hall that was
supposed to serve as a speak-out, but was just playing funk for a few
casual dancers, sometimes so loud that it seemed like they were
attempting to drown out the actual protest. The rest of the 1000 people
were gathered around a much smaller sound system in the adjacent
intersection, having their own speak-out. The soap box ran from about
5-8 p.m., and the “don’t tear up Oakland” position that was emphasized
so strongly at past protests seemed to have taken a back seat on the
collective agenda of the group. Most messages were that this verdict is
bullshit, the system isn’t going to give justice for Oscar Grant, and we
need to organize. There was also a strong recognition that Black people
were the targets of this violence and of the need for Black nationalism.
The typical divisive tactics that we had
reported
on at previous at Oscar Grant movement events was also present. One man
insisted on addressing “just the Oaklanders” and advised the Black youth
to not get “pimped” by “outside agitators.” The response from the crowd
was cold. The next speaker said he was also asked to speak on “outside
agitators” and went on to point out that Martin Luther King, Jr. was
called an “outside agitator” everywhere he went in the South. He said
that no one is “outside” the struggle for justice, and went on to point
out that the only people who are coming from outside the movement to
cause problems were the pigs. This brother received enthusiastic cheers.
This theme was one that had been playing out for weeks within the
organizations preparing for the verdict. Reportedly, non-profit leaders
and those working with the City government were spearheading the line
that the Black youth of Oakland couldn’t rebel without white people from
the suburbs telling them what to do. This racist bullshit had already
been struggled against for weeks leading up to the verdict. While some
in the crowd were dismissive of white speakers, telling them to get
down, ultimately it was the content of what was being said that the
protesters recognized. While there was a strong contingent of
self-proclaimed locals saying “be cool” and using the local slang to
attempt to create divisions, their effect seemed minimal.
During the speak out, pigs were lined up several blocks from the
protest, controlling foot traffic and warning “unsuspecting” bicyclists
of the “danger” ahead. At 8 p.m. the soap box was shut down by the City
and everyone was hanging out in the streets, occupying several blocks of
Broadway. After about thirty minutes, a trash can was lit on fire but
protesters put it out within a minute. Occasional bottles were thrown at
the pigs, and when any excuse was given to the pigs to attack, many of
the protesters would run like hell. The pigs were surprisingly
non-reactive, however, and would just occasionally change positions,
pushing the protest north on Broadway. This didn’t prevent “Fuck the
Police” from being the most popular chant of the night.
A Foot Locker was looted, and many people made out with fresh kicks and
jerseys. A group of three to four protesters started guarding the Foot
Locker and tried to appeal to the protesters to not loot, which they
said would prove that they are just ignorant Black people and would
prove “them” right (“them” presumably being the white legislators and
City officials who they hope to ask for justice). On the other hand, the
guards correctly emphasized that there are Black organizations to get
involved in to deal with these issues, and that looting the shoe store
won’t stop killings. If there was a strong Black vanguard in the area,
MIM(Prisons) would have worked with them at this event rather than
promoting study and building of new cadre groups. That’s not to say
there aren’t a number of small, semi-underground formations that are
worth working with, but none of them wield the power or influence to
have led the rebellion.
The Black Panther Party asserted the need for a vanguard to organize and
lead the masses down the most effective path to power in The Correct
Handling of a Revolution, following the uprisings in 1968 across
the country. It states, “There are basically three ways one can learn:
through study, through observation, and through actual experience.” They
go on to say that the Black community generally learns through
observation and participation. Unfortunately, the lessons put forth in
this article were not observable at the demonstrations this year or
last, indicating that study is needed. While the fires, graffiti and
smashed windows grab our immediate attention, it is the serious
organizing efforts that will allow the Oscar Grant movement to have a
lasting effect. While it is hard to quantify these efforts now, the mood
of the speakers indicate that despite the lack of a vanguard
organization leading the rebellions, many are thinking and moving in
this direction.
Over the next few hours the crowd gradually dwindled, smoke bombs and
fire crackers were set off, windows broken, over a dozen dumpsters and
trash cans lit up, graffiti was sprayed, garbage cans tossed into the
transit stations, as the crowd was constantly pushed north, sectioned
off, and divided by the pigs. At one point the street lights went out
and three gun shots were fired from an unknown source, but apparently
nobody was hit. Unlike the usual large demonstrations in the Bay Area,
many protesters tonight were armed, but attacks on police were limited
to rocks, bottles and, according to police, a few molotov cocktails. By
11 p.m., the protest had reduced to small groups launching hit-and-run
tactics on stores. Their movement seemed guided by the police, who
vastly outnumbered them. At the end of the day, there were 78 arrests.
Although our comrades were not on the front lines for the whole
showdown, a tazer was only heard once, and while there were regular
explosions heard, no reports are claiming that they were caused by the
kkkops. Overall it seemed like the pigs were on their best behavior (for
being stinking fucking pigs, anyway). This was clearly unexpected
behavior by most protesters, who were constantly running at the
slightest sign of action, only to return a few minutes later when they
realized the tear gas and rubber bullets had yet to arrive. Activists
were expecting the worst, including the use of the a $675,000 long-range
acoustic device (a machine that produces sound waves that can cause
permanent damage) that the Oakland Police Department recently purchased.
Again, it never showed up.
The pigs outnumbered and outlasted the protesters. When the rebels had
been reduced to a couple hundred, the pigs still had reinforcements
coming in and surely more on standby. The fact that there was no need to
resort to severe repression demonstrated their control over the
situation. Evidently, they were willing to sacrifice a few downtown
businesses as a pressure release. The next morning, the Oakland police
chief was celebratory about their ability to control and contain the
rebellions.
Mehserle’s sentence is due out in November, and could range from 14
years in prison to probation. We expect the day of sentencing to
re-ignite these protests all over the state.
Notes: Prisoners write us for a copy of “Oscar Grant: organization, line
and strategy” printed on the anniversary of the initial rebellions
following Grant’s murder.