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.
In Under Lock & Key No. 83 (Fall 2023) there was an
article authored by the Komrade General Divine Minister titled “The
Enemy Within,” wherein the Komrade expressed his antipathy for the
prisoners who have malleable and submissive personalities. I intend to
elucidate upon why said prisoners are so complacent and have an
unfortunate propensity for collaborating with their overseers. However,
before doing so I find it necessary to elucidate what constitutes a
political prisoner.
Major documents have been written on this subject and multiple
definitions have been used to define what constitutes a political
prisoner. From Komrade George Jackson’s definition:
“All Black people, wherever they are, whatever their crimes, even
crimes against other Blacks, are political prisoners because the system
has dealt with them differently than with Whites. Whitey gets the
benefit of every law, every loophole, and the benefit of being judged by
his peers – other White people. Blacks don’t get the benefit of any such
jury trial by peers. Such a trial is almost a cinch to result in the
conviction of a Black person, and it’s a conscious political decision
that Blacks don’t have those benefits…”(1)
To the definition given by the Komrades of MIM(Prisons):
“All prisoners are political. War is politics and prisons are war.
While some enter prison politicized, many more are politicized
inside…”(2)
Albeit, both definitions provide some context, they ultimately fail
to explicate the criterion for Political Prisoners. As explained by the
New Afrikan Freedom Fighter Atiba Fakih:
“PRACTICE is that criterion. Political Prisoners are Revolutionaries;
they are conscious and active servants of the people, Political
Prisoners direct their energies toward the enemies of the people – they
do not commit”crimes” against the people. Political Prisoners are
Revolutionary Cadre; they are “fighting men and women” from among the
people. Political Prisoners are the most conscious element of the
people. While they are a “part of” the people, distinctions must be made
between them and the colonized masses as a whole.”(3)
This definition draws a clear line of demarcation between the
political prisoner and the “inmate slave”. Unlike the complacent,
submissive prisoner, the political prisoner has undergone a process of
social and mental growth. S/he has transformed the criminal mentality
into a revolutionary mentality, further arming themselves with the
discernment that is needed to combat the war of attrition that has been
launched by the oppressor nation.
The distinctions between the political prisoner and the “inmate
slave” are sharped by the political prisoner’s praxis. However, this
doesn’t relieve the political prisoner from eir duties of doing
Mobilizing, Organizing, Revolutionizing, & Educating among eir
peers. With knowledge comes responsibility.
You see the “real enemy” recognizes that these prisons are reservoirs
full of freedom fighters from the oppressed nations who are most
receptive and responsive to the need to become conscious, active
participants in the war against the chief colonizer. Which is why the
overseers are adroit at dividing and conquering the “inmate slave”.
We become complicit to the war being waged against us when we further
alienate the “inmate slave”. We must understand everything and everybody
is a unity of opposites and everything is in motion and changing all the
time. Internal contradictions are the basis for change, but external
factors set the conditions and influence. If we look for the worst in
people, we shall always find it, this is not so difficult, but it is
better to bring out the good in them if we can. Alienating people is
easy, but inspiring them takes more effort and has better results.
Getting angry and fed up with our peers is also easy, it takes more
effort to understand the cause of their behavior. You see when adopting
an ideology that compels – at some point – one to take a confrontational
stand against a stronger opponent based solely upon principle, one must
have a certain mental and emotional fortitude and commitment. The
majority of our peers don’t have this sort of constitution; therefore,
this certain mental and emotional fortitude must be instilled in our
peers and this can only be done if we assist them with breaking the
psychological barriers that have stultified their will to resist.
The prisoner is the child of a domestically colonized people – a
people who have been traumatized, abused, miseducated, murdered,
denigrated, and perpetually subjected to economic insecurities. Under
these conditions their values and sense of self have been destroyed,
therefore making them susceptible to manipulation and other
psychological warfare techniques.
As the Komrade Joka Heshima Jinsai points out:
“Perhaps the single most glaring proof that New Afrikan people, Our
people, suffer from colonial psychosis (i.e. irrational behavior by
colonial subjects) is the historic and consistent irrational responses
We have had to Our collective oppression.”(4)
He goes on to say:
“The people, by and large, have been conditioned to compete, not
cooperate, to revere hyper-individualism while looking skeptically upon
collective work and responsibility; to be dependent on the same
institutions responsible for their oppression, instead of depending on
one another.”(4)
We must always remember to remember this when struggling with Our
peers. The oppressors have waged some intense psychological warfare on
us. Some are just not going to be receptive to progressive thinking.
Nevertheless I’m firmly convinced that if we do Mobilizing, Organizing,
Revolutionizing, & Education We will create conditions that promote
an ethics of duty, loyalty, commitment, and responsibility.
The Struggle is Never Ending
Sources: 1. George Jackson, Blood in my Eye. 2. “On
Transforming The Colonial/Criminal Mentality”, New Afrikan P.O.W.
Journal, Book One. 3. General Divine Minister, October 2023, “Where
Your Loyalty Lies, The Enemy Within”, Under Lock & Key No. 83 Fall
2023. 4. Joka Heshima Jinsai, On Withdrawal, Part 1.
“(We) MIM Should not excuse behaviors that could have been avoided
with asexuality. It must weigh the costs of being non-sexual.” - MIM
Theory 2/3
Transforming the criminal mentality into a revolutionary one means
also fully confronting bourgeois culture, morality and its justification
for the existing society, i.e. bourgeois rule. This bourgeois mentality
also includes things that aren’t necessarily “criminal” but definitely
constitute crimes against others and from a proletarian perspective and
for our aims is at the very least counter-productive if not counter
revolutionary. Sadly, as Wiawimawo stated, due to us being products of
this decadent society we all enter the Revolution with some amount of
sickness. Some suffer from drug addictions, some selfishness and extreme
individualism, others idealism, patriarchy or even out right misogyny,
e.g. “Fuck a Bitch” or other forms of sexism. Most “criminal” lumpen
glorify gangsterism and are quite infatuated with gang culture even when
pretending to be about unifying the block…. But regardless, we all enter
the revolutionary process with ways of the “old society” especially
since it hasn’t gone anywhere.
The above quote is from a Comrade who ultimately died due to a
lifetime battle with drugs. Yet this is a quite Revolutionary and apt
quote and this comrade’s life is also apt for this discussion as it
shows no matter how advanced we become and even how authentic our walk,
we will always be confronted not only with the broader bourgeois society
and its fucked up music, culture, morals, world out-look etc etc ad
nauseam. We still are likely to have to confront and check our own
bourgeois demons. But the above quote could be applicable to
revolutionary Walkin’ in general if any of our behaviors could be
avoided simply by avoiding self-indulgence if our goal is truly
revolution then we should practice abstinence in that regard whenever
possible.
I personally have never came to jail sober and have done all manner
of anti-social behavior “under the influence” since I’ve been in prison
I’ve yet to get drunk. For me this was so stark it was no choice at all.
Additionally other counter-productive behaviors were also not so
difficult for me to conquer or at least consciously struggle against.
Yet for all my talk I was quite chauvinistic and I’d say misogynistic in
actual practice and this is something I’ve struggled with since I was in
elementary.
There was a time when I rationalized my misogynistic behavior – I’ve
now come to believe this had a lot to do with my inability to conduct
consistent communist practice – however, I’m now quite clear that this
is simply lumpen and its kissing cousin petty bourgeois personification
and practice and furthermore serves only to strengthen counter
revolution.
I am not too hard on myself for this late transformation however –
every single day in this decadent society we have to swallow, weigh,
witness or consciously wrestle with all manner of bourgeois bullshit.
Life may be good but this world is truly a nightmare. In these death
camps, in a real concentration camp, in slave quarters, in an
immigration caravan, in dark alleys and hallways thrash out this
imperialist dominated world what people must go through especially when
there’s no real struggle to resist and defeat this oppression (as proven
by amerikkka’s nuclear bombs) even shadows get burnt… yes shadows were
literally burnt into the ground.
Yet I’m now quite clear on my need to confront this as it is simply
another tool the state can use to divide, dismiss or exploit real
revolutionary work. This always makes me think of focoism, its
attraction is “to go out on a high note”… I understand this quite well.
I also think this is why lumpen and petty bourgeois youth in the
semi-colonies often have a hard time with revolutionary ideas, party’s
and practices as all they know is immediate release, this in addition,
is why so many Rev’s succumb to self-obsession or self indulgence’s. But
once I accepted this is simply lumpen/petty bourgeois bullshit behavior
it was easier for me to confront it as any good homie, friend and
especially “comrade” should know s/he is not only a reflection of the
community, party, professed ideas etc he/r can also undermine, expose or
bring harm to he/r person, community, or just their ideas which for a
revolutionary communist must be unacceptable.
I speak in general terms because specific failures, flaws, addictions
or internalized petty bourgeois (wanna be big bourgeois) bullshit isn’t
new to the movement and once I realized how destructive
(counter-revolutionary in fact) my failure to totally transform and
practice my all too parroted “self discipline” – something as stated I’m
quite adamant about “Walkin my walk”… Yet I gave the enemies a free tool
to use against me and against us – again I do know why for some focoism
is a “natural release”… working w/ ideas and for “long-term goals”
especially in isolation of an active movement has been the death of many
good Rads and whole collectives especially where self-discipline
requires we police things that we once considered quite natural or even
which is common practice for others but the state has made it taboo for
us.
I read an article in The Abolitionist (Summer 2022) where a
captive was released and days later his parole agent came to place an
electronic monitor on his ankle which he knew would be a condition of
parole, but still days later after she placed the “E.M.” on him she
called and explained he will be allowed out the house 6:00am-10:00am and
this should be plenty of time “For you to handle your business”. I
couldn’t help but think how after 10:00 it would be unlawful to walk to
the corner store or park, to go to school, work, to date, build
community ties etc etc and how his actions will be a reflection of
larger class forces and struggles where if he failed it would set back
the opportunity for someone else to be released on “E.M.” supervision
and to succeed he would need all the self-discipline in the world not to
look out the window at 11 see a friend or interesting person come
outside to talk and walk with them to the corner…I imagine all the
lawful things a Jew in Nazi Germany or slave in amerikkka was
forbidden.
Amerikkka exploits and sanctions the world so its unlawful to aid
Cuba, to encourage oppressed people to keep their resources for
themselves, to disrupt military supply chains or even expose what the
government is doing to the public. On 22 August 2022, KPFA Radio’s
“Letters and Politics” had a canadian Marxist scholar on who the host
asked “isn’t it an advancement that we have a better life thanks to
capitalism?” (this was the gist) The Marxist scholar replied “Yes”(even
under the new mode of production we don’t want to lose those “freedoms”)
and conceded this as advancement. Yet I contend both the host and this
Rad suffered from self-deception. I think Huey’s “intercommunal” line
was bullshit – to say nations don’t exist – but capitalism has infact
now transferred and transposed the class struggle from core countries to
exploited countries largely on the global south so whole countries live
the bourgeois life to one degree or another, and the proletariat is now
largely confined to their own powerless “nations.”
So for so many others they make do with left over bourgeois scraps. I
saw a documentary a while back about how the U.$. was sending its
plastic and metal scraps to the Third World as part of its neo-liberal
deals with them – just as now Biden can promise less greenhouse gas from
U.$ corporations “in amerikkka” but will never say they can’t offset
this by reckless disregard for the oppressed nations. Part of the
question to the canadian Marxist was also a statement that slavery is no
more “thanks to capitalism” to which the Marxist agreed, hence his
statement we don’t want to lose those “freedoms” but slavery very much
exists outside of the “shiny city on the hill”, outside the gate they
root through U.$ trash like pigs looking for mushrooms, women still are
very much oppressed and yes slavery, I repeat, still exists. Yet they’re
always judged by the standards of the exploiters and defenders of the
city gates who gladly lower the drawbridge for the returning army with
its war booty.
I stopped drinking because I get drunk and have no inhibitions, no
fear and no rationalizations. Likewise I wrestled with self-indulgences
“because they were denied” and I too have absolutely no respect for the
enemy. Even when drunk I’ve never intentionally hurt anyone I loved,
never fought my friends, never stole from loved ones etc, but not so for
a perceived enemy, or if I felt I deserved something, or revenge was
called for. All this was obviously before I became a revcom. But I know
where it all came from and what it represents, its lumpen/petty
bourgeois sentiments struggling with social, dictates that “I’m
nothing,”“We’re nothing,”“You can’t have,” “You don’t deserve,” etc etc.
But I know, because I couldn’t control it, I’d have to leave it alone.
So now I’ve arrived rather late, at a similar conclusion of another
thing I must deny myself due to how it can never be a resolvable
contradiction (for me). I think it was jesus who said (according to
grandma’s bible) that if your right eye causes you to sin cast it out.
If a revolutionary could paint the mystical soul it would be a macabre
creature… stitched and resewn on wings, scars, busted knuckles etc
etc.
I am quite clear on a few things and the utter failure of
capitalism-imperialism and its rule is one of those things that I have
much clarity on. Will I slip up? will it be as easy as alcohol for me?
will the enemy be able to conspire against me? will there ever be any
normalcy in my life? will it always be ad hoc salvaging? will revcoms
ever beat back lumpen/petty bourgeois culture and ideas to be the
undisputed voice for the semi-colonies? I may never know these things we
may not like all the answers to those things, but I’m quite sure there’s
millions of people who like me will never forgive this system for what
not only it’s done to the world or ourselves but the choices and
contradictions we’ve been forced to wrestle with due to its rule and its
utter disregard for our humanity will never be forgiven and whose dogged
focus is to bring about a Revolutionary Communist World.
Amerikkkan media feels compelled to state each and every time
election talk is brought up that it’s the “Big lie” to claim it was
stolen and to be unequivocal about Putin and Russia’s invasion as to the
cause of the war in Ukraine and to be clear on the need to support
Ukraine’s effort to win the war, it makes sure it always says it was a
coup attempt on Jan 6 and that Amerikkka is a democracy. All this
because truth is important. One of my favorites is Ben Fletcher who is a
petty bourgeois radical who says it’s right to defend Ukraine simply
because its unlawful. I wish I could search his writings talks etc but
I’d wager dollars to donuts he has never said arms should be shipped to
Palestine to defend against or push out Israeli troops, not even New
Afrikans should arm themselves to fight back when pigs kill us nor
although he says he said it was wrong to invade Iraq etc I’d bet he
never said Iraqi’s should be aided to kill U.$. troops or he or any
“leftist” in KKKville should support the counter-insurgency I’d bet had
he and his ilk done so it would’ve had an effect on secular forces so
now only Islamists are given a voice and many even long for the klan to
return.
The labor aristocracy and other layers of the bourgeois here are
quite in lock step. The only questions are which bourgeois party will
win elections or steal them. We are looking at fascist forces, wars,
possible world wars, environmental devastation, national oppression and
we daily witness the consequences of what having a shining city on a
hill entails and what it forces on others to do to survive not being a
part of the in crowd, but this is no one’s concern and misleaders like
the media or “Labor Leader” Ben Fletcher can only parrot Democratic or
anti-Republican talkin’ points and even so called communists or at least
“Marxists” can not see beyond bourgeois horizons.
For these reasons we must shore-up our ranks and connect with the
broader proletariat movement. As its quite clear we will be in the
wilderness for sometime, only practice and work will forge us ahead and
conquer our bourgeois and lumpen demons. We can not be idle, not in
prison, not school houses, not under capitalism-imperialism. They’re not
idle. Steel sharpens steel. Proletariat morals and practice forever
taken to a new level. These last paragraphs are not a mis-step; I
contend we defeat our demons when we keep bourgeois morality clearly
juxtaposed to proletariat morality and ideology. They currently are
running laps around us here in amerikkka. Most people can conceive of
“the end of the world” but can’t conceive of a New World with new social
relations and a new mode of production that they themselves must work
for and this is our failure to own.
Yet in this answer we can show a new type of Revcom responsive to the
extensive body of work of real Maoism and revolutionary practice.
Unbroken macabre spirits on display and in motion will never win over
someone like Ben Fletcher the Mis-leader, nor bourgeois media but we can
clearly show the dividing line between bourgeois (lumpen included) and
revolutionary-proletariat-feminist-nationalists. This could be quite a
powerful thing, and because there’s larger forces at work, if nothing
else, self-discipline and revolutionary “consistent” practice at the
very least may deny the enemy another victory.
A core aspect of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism is the bond between theory
and practice. For instance, there is a theoretical analysis of the labor
aristocracy in the imperialist countries and the practical application
of that theory is not organizing around labor aristocrat interests.
There is a theoretical analysis of building independent institutions
among the masses; and the practical application of that theory is
building United Struggle Within grievance campaigns, building Maoist
prison study groups, building peace between lumpen organizations through
the United Front for Peace in Prisons, etc. There is a theoretical
analysis of revolution; and the practical application of that theory is
boycotting elections, refusing to use armed struggle as a bargain chip
and instead see it as a necessity, etc. These are just some broad and
simplified examples of the relationship between theory and practice to
paint the picture. Incorrect practice and incorrect theories go hand in
hand: one strengthens the existence of another.
The main purpose of this article is to start a series of articles
akin to the “Ongoing
Discussion on Organizing Strategy” series which started among USW
comrades.(1) The series has been productive on maintaining a two-line
struggle within the USW and the overall prison movement, and delves deep
into the many questions raised in organizing behind bars. We hope to
bring that energy of discussing strategy and tactics of Maoist
organizing behind bars to that of political line both inside and outside
U.$. prisons. These bad ideas aren’t dividing line questions (such as
the labor aristocracy question or the class nature of the Chinese
Communist Party in 2022) that MIM(Prisons) struggle with other communist
organizations through polemics. Rather, these are day-to-day bad ideas
and attitudes that many people take up within the communist movement
(even good comrades). They enforce liberalism during line struggle, and
stunt scientific thinking. Let’s begin.
1.
Defending Revisionism Through One’s Laurels and Clout
One example of this was when Joma
Sison repeatedly refused to acknowledge the national contradiction as
principal in the United $tates, and communists refused and still
refuse to criticize due to his historically integral role in the
People’s War in the Philippines.(2) Communists don’t look at persynal
laurels or prestige when it comes to criticism; everything and everyone
that partakes in bad practice and bad beliefs is targetable for
criticism. If the Sison defenders said “historically and currently, the
United $tates’ principal contradiction has always been class and is
currently class” then perhaps there will be more legitimacy for line
struggle and discussion albeit it still being a chauvinist and
revisionist take. However, what does Joma Sison being a historically
great revolutionary leader that rectified the errors of the Communist
Party of Philippines in the 60s-70s have to do with the fact that the
current United $tates’ society has developed around the oppressed
nations in a historical materialist manner?
Now if a former neo-nazi prisoner who joined the United Struggle
Within brings up how the white workers are the masses, then bringing up
his past identity as a neo-nazi would be more relevant in criticizing
this individual comrade to the correct line from an incorrect one since
his past practice as an Amerikan First World lumpen could influence his
current politcs. Ultimately, bringing up his past errors (or victories
even) is only a small part of criticizing the comrade, and ultimately
it’s the combating of that idea and political practice that will be the
final nail in the coffin of getting rid of that bad line from that
comrade’s thinking and most importantly the overall movement. A part of
this problem contains in identity politics, which leads to the next
point.
2. Incorrect Handling
of Identity Politics
Identity politics has been a hot topic among communists with some
seeing it as non-antagonistic with Marxism and with many joining the
conservative reactionary bandwagon of fascists ranting about “woke”
culture and post-modernism. The classic Amerikan value of pragmatist
empiricism (the idea of the only way to truly know anything is through
directly experiencing it) is antithetical to Maoism, and it is our
stance that post-modernism and identity politics can be looked at it the
same or adjacent manner in terms of philosophy. The Maoist doctrine of
cadres learning from practice and the masses learning revolution through
waging revolution can become Amerikan pragmatism if we aren’t
careful.
Today in 2022, this pragmatist empiricist idea is popular among the
oppressed nations represented in popular day-to-day slogans such as
“don’t speak over (insert a particular oppressed group)” and “stay in
your lane” when a person not belonging to a certain social group
(gender, religion, sexuality, nation, etc.) is talking about issues
pertaining to said certain group since they don’t directly experience
that group’s existence. Some revisionists see no problem with identity
politics and post-modernism, and think that identity politics and
post-modernism must be a good thing because the fascists are complaining
about it and complaining about it must mean one is a fascist. Other
revisionists have straight up adopted national chauvinism. When the
masses criticize the communists with “a lot of communists are racist and
don’t really care about black/brown/indigenous people” these chauvinists
resort to taking up fascist talking points and attitudes against
identity politics and post-modernism.
It is an important Maoist doctrine that post-modernism and
pragmatist-empiricism are both unscientific capitalist garbage that
poisons the masses. It is another Maoist doctrine that the masses under
oppression will go to the current superstructure of the enemy
(capitalist philosophies, capitalist institutions, the capitalist state,
etc.) during times of oppression. When communists have failed the masses
of the United $tates for 400 years by supporting the white workers and
putting the national contradiction beneath white worker interests at
best and attacking oppressed nation masses alongside the white workers
at worst, then perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised when the oppressed
nations go to classical Amerikan pragmatism and post-modernism of
relying on lived experiences and changing discourse instead of
dialectical materialist thinking and revolution. This is especially true
for the case where the oppressed nations are majority labor aristocrat
as well – the class where this ideology grows the most ferociously
amongst.
The communists have failed in Afghanistan with Soviet revisionism, so
the Afghan masses went to the existing superstructures within the
semi-colonial, semi-feudal nation such as Jihad instead of people’s war.
Instead of lambasting the Afghan (or in this case the Chicano, First
Nations, and New Afrikan) masses, perhaps communists should get their
heads out of their asses, and try to appreciate
why Jihad/pragmatist-empiricism as an idea (despite its reactionary
content) is so popular among the masses in the first place.(3)
One interesting thing we see as a Maoist prison cell is that identity
politics tend to be less popular among prisoners which perhaps shows
that the oppressed nation labor aristocracy might go for identity
politics for its liberation far more than the oppressed nation lumpen
who might go for conspiracy theories or capitalist boot-strap mentality
which we see more popular among prisoners and less with the student
activist types that concern themselves more with identity politics. This
leads to the third point.
3.
Hating the Masses for their Reactionary Ideas under Oppression
Identity politics isn’t the only bourgeois idea that the masses hold
from the current capitalist superstructure. There are other ideas such
as patriarchy, homophobia, pulling one-self up by the bootstraps, voting
for the lesser evil, superstition, conspiracy theories, and religion
just for starters. When the masses show these tendencies, many
communists throw them into the enemy camp and treat them as if they were
enemies. For example, a communist student activist type might walk up to
a Black Hebrew Israelite and the topic of anti-semitism could pop up.
The communist university student will call the Black Israelite a fascist
for his views and say the Black Israelite should stay in his lane about
Jewish issues. When Mao said that we want politics in command and
political line is principal, he didn’t mean that our friends and enemies
are determined by their personal beliefs (whether that be politics,
religion, moral principles, cultural traditions, etc.). Mao didn’t say
“any Chinese peasant who participates in foot binding should be
ostracized from the movement.” And we can argue that foot binding is
much more backwards and patriarchal than the common
patriarchal/reactionary cultural values held by oppressed nations masses
in 2022. In fact, Mao’s method of finding out who our friends and
enemies were in China was by looking at a group of people’s relation to
the means of production, relation to consumption, and relations to other
classes; and through this method he concluded that the Chinese peasantry
were friends not enemies despite binding women’s feet so they don’t run
away from their husbands being a popular cultural trend among said
class.
Let’s look at the New Afrikan labor aristocracy as an example. We can
see that the class basically has access to the means of production
through its citizen status much like the Amerikan workers in 2022 (dead
labor of third world proletarians; higher wages gained through
super-exploitation of Africa, Asia, and Latin America; ability to buy
and invest in stocks; etc.) We can also look at how it consumes far more
than the international proletariat of Africa, Asia, and Latin America;
but consistently consume less than its Amerikan counterparts such as how
New Afrikan labor aristocrats are disproportionately more likely to live
under the country’s poverty line compared to Amerikan labor aristocrats.
We can also find out how its relations to the Amerikan labor aristocrat
are far more hostile than friendly as the poorer an Amerikan is the more
likely they are to hold extreme chauvinsit views (i.e. rednecks).
However, as embourgeoisfication of the New Afrikan workers solidified
during the later half of the 20th century, their relation to the migrant
proletarians (and migrants in general) of the Third World became more
hostile as well: previous contradictions which were relatively
non-antagonistic such as that in relation to the
Mexican/Nigerian/Caribbean migrants are more antagonistic in our current
day. So with these factors in mind, we can argue that this class of
people (yes that includes the Black Hebrew Israelite with anti-Semitic
tendencies) have interests for revolution against Amerika but might be
more reserved when it comes to internationalism and involving the class
in it self with other nations’ liberations. This is compared to the
Hindi proletariat who will be far less wishy washy as a class in
involving themselves with the struggle of the Dravidian proletariat when
reaching class consciousness. So in conclusion, with proper political
organizing the New Afrikan labor aristocracy would be a friend of the
revolution.
Instead of this method of finding out who our friends and enemies
are, most communists consider friends as people who have the correct
takes on an xyz issue most people don’t even care about and enemies as
people who hold reactionary views. One source of this ideology is how
Amerikan culture promotes individual thinking and behavior as the mover
of history rather than class struggle. With this mindset, racism is a
problem started by individual Amerikans thinking and behaving racist and
will end when individual Amerikans cease thinking and behaving racist.
The Maoist method on the other hand sees that racism is a problem that
was brought to inception by remnants of feudal European aristocrats (a
class of people) stealing this land at gunpoint and trickery from what
would become the modern First Nations, and enslaving what would become
modern New Afrikans and militaristically invading the Mexican nation’s
land, solidifying what would become modern Chicanos all for the various
Amerikan classes’ interests (whether that be the big capitalist class,
the small business owning capitalist class, or even the common Amerikan
worker).
The Maoist solution is for these national contradictions to be
resolved through the oppressed nations overthrowing Amerika through
revolution. These historical events of Amerikan land conquest, slavery,
and genocide were also crucial in acting as primitive accumulation for
global capitalism-imperialism in general not only for Amerika. There is
no modern day $outh Korea, Japan, Au$trailia, I$rael, $audi Arabia,
Kanada, and so on without Amerikan slavery, Amerikan land conquest, and
Amerikan genocide. Therefore proletarian dictatorship must be
established to resolve this contradiction as well as overthrow of
Amerika. But because of individualist Amerikan culture, national
chauvinism is something treated with tone and etiquette led by student
youth tired of their parents’ old backwards ways. This leads to the
fourth problem.
4. The Sub-Culture Problem
Many newer generation communists have begun their politics through
the internet. The original MIM was one of the first communist parties to
have a website and put credence in the importance of the internet. It
certainly is a politically important tool if it’s a major way youth are
becoming interested in Lenin, and how all the imperialist governments
partake in it in different ways from the FBI surveilling political
internet forums to the Chinese Communist Party banning entire social
media outlets. However, what the old MIM didn’t predict is that
communist groups on social media aren’t the ones that primarily
influence kids to read Mao Zedong and study the Black Panthers.
Communist groups are far outshadowed online by memes, twitch streamers,
tik tok spheres, instagram pages, internet forums, and the likes when it
comes to converting kids to communism than communist organization
internet presence. This has given rise to the problem of communism
becoming more akin to a sub-culture talked about on social media sites
like twitter and reddit than a political movement. Different political
stances from Maoism, Trotskyism, all the way to Stirnerite Anarchism
cease to become guides to action, but a thing to put on your bio.
Various people’s wars and nations at war become more akin to fandoms for
TV shows to obsess and argue over rather than a movement to popularize
and create awareness for. Political line ceases to become a belief and
action that one takes, but a take one has so they can get on the
algorithm. Line struggle turn into flame wars with no purpose of uniting
with others, but exist only to express one’s individual self for the
cathartic feeling of having the correct line.
In day-to-day real life, communism might be becoming less and less
pariah’d in the eyes of the average Amerikan; but communism itself is
becoming more and more revisionist, more and more toothless, more and
more a pop culture joke, and more and more a harmless icon of a once
revolutionary movement that became hijacked by the bourgeoisie after its
death, as Lenin spoke of. We took 20 steps forward and a million steps
back when it comes to fighting against anti-communist culture leftover
from the red scare era. Turns out Amerikan individualism was far more of
an obstacle in making Maoism popular than the legacy of McCarthyism.
We shouldn’t throw away the internet with the bathwater as it indeed
took a certain part in making the oppressor nation Amerikan youth become
interested in revolutionary politics, but we should also be acutely
aware of the sub-culture problem. A single New Afrikan, Chican@, or
Indigenous member of the masses understanding the Maoist concept of
reform and revolution and practicing to boycott the elections while not
calling themselves communist nor wearing red armbands is 100 times more
valuable to us in spreading popular support against imperialism than 300
college students with a Stalin portrait in their dorm rooms who thinks
the white worker is a friend.
Conclusion
Many of these problems can only really be solved through the
development of our movement as a whole. Even writing and publishing this
article in Under Lock & Key can only do so much. Our
dedicated prisoner comrades who read this will certainly be influenced,
and perhaps they will get more insight as to the problems of the
“activist” scene that they will be adjacent with once they get out; but
when it comes to student youth abandoning Liberalism or the masses on
the street taking up scientific thinking, it is up for the MIM (and not
just the prison ministry) to develop and go to the masses as Mao said.
For our readers and supporters outside, we challenge them to set up
geographical MIM cells or work with MIM(Prisons) to develop the modern
MIM. For our readers and supporters inside, we list these problems of
the movement to stay sharp and aware once they get released.
Notes: 1. starting in ULK 73, prisoners write in for a
copy of the full series 2. MIM, Applied internationalism: The
difference between Mao Zedong and Joma Sison. 3. Wiawimawo, January
2016, Islam a Liberation Theology, Under Lock & Key
No. 48.
by Melo x August 2022 permalink
This drawing is a response to one of the questions from our intro study
program on the materialist method of knowledge
[Responding to “What did you disagree with?” when studying “Where Do
Correct Ideas Come From?”]
I disagreed with the basis of idealism not being action. To think is
action. Thought can be provoked by stimuli collected by the body’s
sensors, which is more reactionary. Or you can create a thought or an
idea, but this is action. Mental action nonetheless but action
all-in-all. And it must be understood physical action comes from mental
action. As I write this I understand the materialist method is physical
action. Well I guess I don’t have a disagreement but rather a question,
is ideas placed on paper in book format considered materialism?
Wiawimawo of MIM(Prisons) responds: As comrade Melo X
explains, we can have thoughts that are reactions to physical stimuli,
or we can create thoughts. But this “creation” of thoughts is also a
response to the physical world. What we might call reason, abstracts
concepts based on our experience with real phenomena, or physical things
we can interact with.
“the faculty of understanding is not a ‘thing in and of itself,’
because it becomes real only in contact with some object.”(1)
Dietzgen explained how the idealists see the mind as separate from
the sense perceptions of the material world. So Melo X is correct to see
the unity between them. The comrade also distinguishes creating thoughts
from more passive perception. This realization demonstrates the role of
reason in developing scientific understanding from our perception of the
physical world around us.
We also agree that our thoughts impact our actions. Hence we stress
class consciousness as an educational process that is a product of our
interactions with the class system.
So, are ideas in a book part of the materialist method? Well, it
depends on what ideas. A book can promote contemplative reasoning.
Bourgeois books will promote bourgeois thinking that harbors much
idealistic reasoning in order to deny the contradictions inherent to the
capitalist system. All that said, 99% of our materialist understanding
of the world is based in history, and therefore must come from books (or
other historical record). If we discarded books in our scientific
pursuits we could not continue to build on the knowledge of the past,
but would be stuck relearning the same things with each generation.
It is a crass form of materialism that says everything must come from
persynal experience and direct interaction with the physical world.
Rather we must learn from the actions of the people who came before us,
and as we develop new theories they must be tested by us in practice
through action and not just tested in our contemplative, subjective
minds. Another way to look at this is that books are recorded practice
and direct experiences of other people. Frederick Douglas’ writings are
from eir practice with chattel slavery, and Lenin’s writings are from
eir practice with the first proletarian revolution. When we say that all
knowledge is 99% history, we’re not saying we should spend all our time
learning using books but to see it as a starting point so we can make
new practice in the future.
Notes: 1. Joseph Dietzgen, The Nature of Human Brain
Work: An Introduction to Dialectics, PM Press, 2010,
p.58.
“We can’t afford rent and we’re sleeping outside. The youths are
jobless” -Yaw Barimah, Ghanaian taxidriver
In late June 2022, street protests erupted in Ghana’s capital city,
Accra. The above quote matches the general feel and demands of the
masses who took to the streets. Most lay persons are aware of the
current effects of inflation on the daily lives of the average people.
Many of us have not made the necessary connection that such inflation
and other tricks capitalists use to increase the amount of surplus value
extracted from the populace, are inherently apart of the internal
dynamics of capitalism itself. Our failure to understand this brings our
protests, and dissent to a screeching halt once the point of economic
reformism is reached.
In countries dominated under imperialist neo-colonialism, such as
Ghana, the weight of economic exploitation is maximized. As conditions
sharpen, the exploited classes of Ghana are beginning to stir. On July
4th four teacher’s unions went on strike in opposition to the
neo-colonial government’s refusal to pay ‘cost-of-living allowances’ of
at least 20% of their wages.
The government holds the position that due to ‘Annual inflation’ now
reaching 27.6% and the accompanied reduction in value of the Cedi(1),
they’re unable to pay this allowance. The system of imperialism works in
a way that parasitic countries like amerika hold economic hegemony over
Third World countries like Ghana. This allows for the U.$. currency, the
dollar, to dictate the value of the national currencies of Third World
countries. What this means for the Ghanaian and other Third World
workers is that because their wages are paid in money, the national
currency, the amount of their pay, although the same on paper, is
devalued along with national currency.
Month-on-Month inflation rates for the Cedi
So the exploitation of the Ghanaian worker has intensified. Their
labor is still required to be done at the same rate, same hours labored,
same amount of labor, and same wage paid. What has changed is the value
of their labor power; with inflation, the amount of cedi it takes to
maintain the worker’s needs is greater. Yet wages have not increased, or
not increased as much.
To allow the common people to overstand our common interest in
overthrowing capitalist dictatorship it is necessary to understand and
breakdown plainly, the inner-working of capitalism and how it effects
the lives of the people.
In Ghana, as described above, and many other places around the world
right now, the mechanism being used by capitalist exploiters is the
depression of wages. This generally occurs when the wages of the worker
are below the value of their labor power. Labor power here means human
work, the sum total of a person’s physical and mental effort.(2) Labor
power is the primary factor in society’s production. Uniquely however,
only in capitalist society is labor power a commodity.
The process of commodification of labor power manifests itself in two
conditions: (1) The worker is ‘free’ in that they can ‘choose’ to sell
their labor as a commodity. (2) The worker owns nothing aside from their
labor power (what the mind/body can produce). They have no means of
productions, or means of living and must sell their labor power to
live.
Therefore, what we know as ‘employment’ in the capitalist economy
consists of capitalists buying the labor power of the laborer and
converting them into hired slaves.
The exploitation of workers is examined by the advent of surplus
value. The degree of exploitation is examined by the rate of surplus
value. The capitalist devises ways to maximize this rate of surplus
value, which brings me back to depression and deduction of wages.
To comprehend wages, we must first overstand that wages are a
‘disguise’. They are a way to fool the people into thinking they’re
getting equal value for their labor.
Marx said, “wages are not what they appear to be. They are not the
value or price of labor, but a disguised form of the value or price of
labor power.”(3) Therefore the capitalists notion that they pay the
worker the price of their labor is completely fabricated.
A key in understanding political economy is to comprehend the
distinction between labor and labor power. Under capitalism what the
worker is selling isn’t labor, but is labor power, which is capable of
being commodified, while the former (labor) isn’t.
The next logical question is why? why is labor not a commodity?
Commodities exist in their final state prior to being sold, labor
doesn’t. Also commodities are exchanged for equal value, according to
the law of value. Therefore if labor was a commodity the capitalist
should pay the full value created by labor, which would eliminate
surplus value (the source of profit), which would eliminate
capitalism.
If labor was a commodity, it would have value and that value would be
determined by the amount of embodied labor. This can’t happen. How can
the value of a phenomenon be determined by the value of itself?
What labor is is the process of labor power. Therefore the wage paid
to the laborer is equal to the value of the labor power. In other words,
it is the amount required to keep the proletariat as a class alive and
working – that is the value of labor power. Whatever extra the worker’s
labor power produces above the value of labor power (the wage paid to
keep the proletariat alive) is called surplus value and
it is what is ‘exploited’ by the capitalist. The wage itself is the
chain that binds the exploiter to the exploited. The revolutionary
demand must be to abolish the wage system.
The term ‘cost of living allowance’, caused me to think of our need
to overstand where the idea of ‘cost of living’ or ‘standard of living’
has its roots.
We begin by concluding that these are two distinctive wages. In the
political economy of capitalism, there are nominal
wages and there are real wages. Nominal wages
are expressed by the wage payment of money.
In our quest to find the ‘cost of living’, we can’t use nominal wages
as representation. The cost of living will only be reflected by the
amount of means of livelihood which can be bought by the money wage
(nominal wage). What the nominal wage can purchase is the cost/standard
of living and is called real wages.
Declining value of Ghana’s cedi priced in U.$. dollars
What is taking place in Ghana is that there is a contradiction
between the nominal and real wages. The nominal wage is being held in
place, while the real wage is in a downward trend, a decline.
“When the purchasing power of money declines and the prices of the
means of livelihood go up, the same amount of the nominal wage can only
be exchanged for a smaller amount of means of livelihood. Then the real
wage falls. Sometimes even if the nominal wage goes up a bit, but less
than the increase in prices of the means of livelihood, the real wage
will still decline.”(4)
This is essentially what we observe playing out in real time in Ghana
and elsewhere. As the above quote alludes to, simple economic reforms
like increase in wage will not end this phenomenon, the elimination of
surplus value is the only solution. The bourgeoisie will always use the
tools of inflation, price increases and rent increases to increase the
contradiction between the nominal wage (money paid) and the real wage
(what can be bought) to increase the rate of surplus value accumulation
(the exploitation of the people).
In conclusion, I want to point out that while the protests organized
by Arise Ghana and the work strike by the four teacher’s unions are
significant struggles for the daily hurdles of life for the Ghanaian
people, the people must be made to distinguish between the causes and
effects of economic hardship. When a sick person has a cold and a
running nose, they don’t merely get a tissue for the nose without curing
the cold itself. The people exploited by imperialism must synthesize the
economic and political struggles.
Closing with a word from Marx,
“The working class should not forget: in this daily struggle they are
only opposing the effect, but not the cause that produces this effect;
they are only delaying the downward trend, not changing the direction of
the trend; they are only suppressing the symptom, not curing the
disease.”(5)
DOWN WITH CAPITALIST-IMPERIALISM!!!
Notes: (1) The Cedi is the national currency of
Ghana. (2) Fundamentals of Political Economy, edited by George C.
Wang,;Chapt.4,pg.59 (3)K.Marx,Critique of the Gotha Program,selected
work of Marx &Engels Vol.3 (4)Fundamentals of Political
Economy,chapt.4,pg72 (5)K.Marx, Wages,Prices and Profit, Selected
Works of Marx &Engels, Vol.2
The task of a revolutionary, regardless of ones political/ideological
or cultural leanings, is to make revolution. Revolution is all about
change. The biggest change that a revolutionary must undertake is the
equivalent to in the religion of Islam what is called Jihad. Jihad is
not limited to what most Western religious enthusiasts have been led to
believe, the meaning of Jihad goes much deeper than the concept of
crusades or mere bombings. The biggest Jihad or battle that one can have
is the battle for control over oneself.(als see MIM(Prisons)’s study
pack on religion) To the revolutionary, this task is important because
he/she has to become the change they wish to produce to the world.
A constant improving of one’s character with the righteousness of
ideals that have went through the rigors of tests to be found or rather
proved to be correct for the overall ordeal of advancement. Once again
before this can be felt by the untapped but potential revolutionary or
the dumb, deaf & blind brother/sister clinging to a culture intended
to kill them, the revolutionary must make this change (revolution)
within his/her own personal character. This is what should be used to
provide an example for others of whom we are trying to reach. This also
however leads us to the conclusion that people no matter the fact that
we come from common ways of living & thinking, are still each
different.
This statement doesn’t mean that I subscribe to individualism,
because true revolutionaries think from the communal mindset. However,
since we are far removed from that concept, we must find ways that are
productive to lead one to the communal mindset that already exists in us
naturally. The idea of individualism is one of the main obstacles to
overall community change, because we’re not acting as organisms moving
together for the betterment of the body (society). But that doesn’t mean
that all aspects of individualism are wrong, for example, “each
according to ability.” So while some may think of us all developing the
mind of the commune will lead us all to thinking like the Borg from Star
Trek (everyone thinking the same thing), I see it more like the Smurfs.
Yes the Smurfs. They had a unified community, accompanied with everyone
playing a specific role. This way shouldn’t just be relegated to one’s
own political vanguard or the military brigade. We have to find some
means of communicating these ideals to everyone. Since we all share a
common enemy, all of our efforts have to revolve around crushing that
threat.
If we relegate ourselves to constantly battling over which of the
communal methods hold the stronger validity, we’ll all end up moving in
our own directions & probably never initializing the changes that we
are the basis of our citizenship within these groups. We’ll more than
likely continue to develop the mentalities they would like for us to
develop, which will ultimately reduce us to caricature. All opinions are
not equal & there is such a thing as counter-productive revisionism.
Our vanguard elements are going to have to develop the use of Democratic
Centralism. This process however must be done without the bitterness
& rancor that can only come from egoism. In fact egoism must be
crushed, because great man personalities have no place in revolution.
Revolution, whether politically or through armed struggle, is all about
the altering of a society that is crushing the life force out of all of
us, this is not an individual problem, once again it is communal!
Dialectical materialism is all about examining things within their
total sequence & seeing the pros & cons in the struggles of the
past. The obvious reason is to better equip ourselves from suffering the
same fate as a result of the same failures of our previous brave
brothers/sisters engaged at trying to crush the outside enemy culture
& to utilize whatever methods may be useful to strengthen what we
already have. A constant improvisation still needs to be done, but this
doesn’t mean that we should stop studying people’s war. We have to study
the principles of people’s war & learn to interpret them to fit our
overall situation here. Most wars of liberation took place in the
countryside of their respective lands. Our situation is different in
that Amerikan settler-colonialism is modernized & at least 80-90% of
Amerika is industrialized, so the nerve centers of this nation are
indeed the cities. This means that hip shooting cops are all around us,
thus making them easier to reach.
In the opening phases of our struggle for liberation, I feel just as
Comrade Jackson felt, that the military proper must be kept hidden &
separate from the political front. You see the role of a political
revolutionary is totally different than the military who are engaged in
armed struggle against macabre freaks. The guerrilla chief is tasked
with communicating to his soldiers that they must protect their
political peoples at their work. If we let our “voices” die to machine
gun fire, no knock invasions, the anonymous tip, political incarceration
& even the work of agent provocateurs & class defectors, then
our dream of eventual freedom will more than likely die with those brave
brothers/sisters. The guerrilla chief however must also have a thorough
understanding of the true nature of fascism, the modern industrial
state, the economic landscape etc. The reason is that if one group dies
or is not as effective the guerrilla chief & his band of
revolutionaries can still keep the revolution alive.
As of now our main problem is the fact that our vanguard &
military groups have shifted their focus from revolution to clinging to
the culture of anti-people crimes. The settler-colonial strategy is law
& order which ultimately means prison – our tactic is perfect
disorder which leads to the proletariat & the lumpen creating mass
disorder to work against the beast (cops) & their vigilante
supporters. In 1969, FBI director J. Edgar Hoover declared that “there
will no longer be a Black Panther Party in the U.S.” The Black Panther
Party was not the only revolutionary group & in spite of popular
belief, they were not just a group working exclusively in the interest
of Blacks. The Black Panther Party like almost every other revolutionary
group, was a communist organization that utilized the principles they
learned from successful communist victories, from examples such as Mao
Zedong and his Red Book. They formed alliances with many other
revolutionary groups and because the Black situation stood out more
(& still does) they were thought to be the overall vanguard party to
even other political & military vanguards. So the goal wasn’t to
just fix conditions in the Black community. That was their primary
objective, but they understood that if you just focused exclusively on
the black conditions and fixing only our areas, we would have to
ghettoize other segments of society that would equal Mexicans, Chican@s,
First Nations, etc.
To stop the progressive elements of unity among different
cultural/revolutionary groups, the establishment caused the leaders of
these groups to distrust their own members. This was done by the
government from planting spies in these groups, along with wiretaps,
surveillance, to out sending letters to leaders that were supposed to
have come other leaders declaring war between the groups. The goals the
establishment used largely worked and eventually several key leaders
either went into hiding, left the country, or were even assassinated
while the political prisoners suffered death legally and
quasi-legally.
Of course progressive thinking was still held as an ideal in some
people’s minds and this led to groups that eventually turned against the
community even further by becoming gangs. Community Revolution in
Progress became the goal for Raymond Washington and Stanley “Tookie”
Williams or Brotherly Love Overriding Oppression & Destruction
became the acronym for Blood. These were good ideas and could’ve worked
if we had received the freedom first. The freedom I’m referring to must
come first in the form of a free-dome because our situation was more
psychological than physical. This means that our minds were created for
the sole purpose of getting us to act against our even better interests.
This shouldn’t be understated since the mindsets that we have now didn’t
exist in communal Africa. These mindsets is what led us to
industrializing this country which ultimately our labor was used as the
down payment on the system of economics that determines one’s status in
this country.
Without the mindsets that we adopted (through long usage) we would’ve
long been better equipped at resisting. But since chattel slavery lasted
for 400 years and we haven’t been free 200 years, how can we hope to win
freedom, especially since once again we are still clinging to the ideas
that created our mindsets in the first place? Since it is our design
that gave beauty to the world, which should be easy to see since others
are quick to pick up on our culture, even sometimes more readily than we
are, we must go back to our own design. This could work for the
betterment of not only us as a group however, this could be used as a
basis to show others righteous examples that could ultimately lead to a
change. But it must begin now. For us to delay what must be done today
is like asking someone else to undertake to aid us in a liberation
effort that must be engaged in by our own efforts.
Another problem working against us is our inability to understand the
difference between reform and change. Largely the only righteous peoples
who were working for us are the people who were attacked by the outside
enemy culture. Anyone else was used because their stance wasn’t
revolutionary. I’m not dismissing people like Martin Luther King Jr.,
Rosa Parks etc, but I know that the main reason why they are mentioned
over people such as Malcolm X or Huey Newton is their view against the
necessity not only of violence and the correct usage of armed struggle,
but it also mainly rests with them telling us to escape from the culture
that we embrace. Malcolm X’s image is only now used because at the end
of his life he was said to have accepted whites. Part of that was true,
but he never said they weren’t devils just because he converted to
orthodox Islam. What he said was that in his view the devil (white man)
could only be redeemed in his opinion through Islam because Christianity
has not redeemed them from not only killing us, but also starting wars
with other whites.
So people like Martin, through his practice of pacifism and his
refusal to go against the culture of Amerikanism, resulted in him
winning a few reforms which are only offered to us as tokens, these
tokens however are not change. Change is why we are no longer looked at
as second class citizens in a world where some are held above others
based on racial & economic reasons. His Imperial Majesty who heavily
inspired Bob Marley to later embrace Rastafarianism, said that “until
the philosophy that the color of one’s skin is as less significant as
the color of one’s eyes there will always be war.” The road to freedom
means freedom, justice & equality for all regardless of one’s
ethnicity, political views, religions, spirituality etc.
We will have this freedom even at the cost of total war. We come to
the conclusion that violence to us may be the only recourse. This
violence shouldn’t be tied to romanticism, it’s about us altering the
conditions that are restricting our passage to freedom. I humbly and
passionately respect all the sincere people who gave their life and
ideas to produce men like me whose goal is to move further than when
they left off and that’s even for those of whom I disagree with. I
recognize that passion leads to different outcomes and different
results, as long as they were intended to benefit us as a whole than
whether I disagree or not I still have the fact that their life force
was used to alter the conditions that is for the betterment of our lives
as a whole. My stance as a whole is rooted around us globally enjoying
freedom, justice & equality. I realize the imperial process is only
complete if the parent imperial nation - USA - is strong so I’m all for
bringing Amerika down to her knees. Anyone who sincerely has that as a
goal I embrace, white or Black I embrace, but it must begin now.
Long Live Guerrilla Chief George Jackson!
Long Live All those Who Don’t Fear Freedom!
Plastick of MIM(Prisons) responds:This comrade here
has given us a core learning element of leading the masses by example –
a new socialist world and a new human being will have to constantly
remove the old world’s reactionary culture and habits.
One thing this comrade has mentioned that we are in disagreement is
in regards to fascism. Originally, the comrade has spoke of fascist
Amerika which has been changed to settler-colonial Amerika by this
responder. We define fascism as a new strategy by the bourgeois
dictatorship when it can no longer rule the way it has ruled before. We
believe that Amerika is likely to turn fascist through a
political-economic crisis which is integral to capitalism-imperialism.
However, we believe that the current state of methods such as police
killings, imprisonment, and exploiting the majority of the world for
superprofits and high level of consumption has always been the way that
Amerika has ruled. When this social-democratic strategy of sharing the
piece of the imperialist pie to the oppressor nation (Amerikans) ceases
to work due to an ever deepening of the crisis, then fascism will indeed
come. Up until now, Amerika has maintained relative strength, and Sun
Tzu taught us to attack when the enemy is helpless.
Within the prison movement there is much talk about ‘political
education’ and ‘raising consciousness’. Truthfully, even when We reflect
on recent and distant episodes in Our collective struggles against the
bourgeoisie, many of us often lament upon the fact that a key ingredient
that has always been lacking from Our movements, parties, organizations,
and the unorganized masses, is the lack of a systemic and organized
framework to political education. Assata Shakur expressed her criticism
of the Black Panther Party for the same reason. Veterans of the Chican@
movement i’ve spoke with have expressed the same criticisms, stating
that had more deliberate, organized approaches been given back in the
days it may have progressively altered the cultural nationalist
tendencies of the movement towards a revolutionary nationalist praxis.
Yet and still, today We’re still stressing, and rightly so, the
paramount importance of political education. However, the question has
become, must become, what is political education, how do we apply it,
and why is it so important?
Political education takes many forms, and phases, and the correct
application of it, or what is paramount for a persyn to know is
dependent upon the conditions one finds themselves in. Thus i begin with
Fanon,
“It is commonly thought with criminal flippancy that to politicize
the masses means from time to time haranguing them with a major
political speech…But political education means opening up the mind,
awakening the mind, and introducing it to the world…To politicize the
masses is not and cannot be to make a political speech. It means driving
home to the masses that everything depends on them, that if we stagnate
the fault is theirs, and that if we progress, they too are responsible,
that there is no demiurge, no illustrious man taking responsibility for
everything, but that the demiurge is the people and the magic lies in
their hands and their hands alone.” (1)
Now as i was saying conditions will determine quite alot. So it is
the line of USW, and many others, that amerika is a settler-neo colonial
imperialist empire, and as such holds actual nations of people
subjugated, meaning their/our self-development is thwarted, within its
borders as well as in the Third World.
Hystory indicated that this line is right and exact. When We recall
the process of how amerika was established we understand that it (nation
of euro amerikan settlers) settled upon this land, removed, and
committed genocide against the native nations of people, some of which
are still among us today. So those (the indigenous) are just one group
of nations within the borders of amerika, which We call the First
Nations. Of course We all know about the forced migration of millions of
Africans, and We know they underwent slavery at the hands of those same
settlers, as did some Natives. What We often fail to analyze is that
slavery, is only an economic system, it is a mode of producing social
value, however, to describe the plight of the African people in amerika
by mere economic lingo alone is highly insufficient. What is the term
that would encapsulate the experience of the economic exploitation,
social and political repression that the African people in amerika
eventually triumphed over? Slavery? No, servitude? No. That one word
which encapsulates that struggle is COLONIALISM.
Well, what the heck is colonialism? Quoting from the Black Liberation
Army Political Dictionary;
Colonialism - foreign domination of a country or a people, where the
economic, political and military structure is controlled and run by the
occupying force. (2)
So African people residing in the United $tates are not merely the
offspring of enslaved people, but a colonized people, and because of
that diametrically opposed nature of a colonized people to its
colonizer, the African people residing in amerika developed organically
into a nation, that is a people distinct from the settler by its
culture, its language, its land, and thus We call this nation today New
Afrika, but others call it Black Amerika, or Black nation, or a host of
other titles. No matter the title New Afrikan people are deep down aware
that they’re distinct and separate, but the reality of a nation within
an empire doesn’t register to some, to most, after a substantial time
frame of this reality being obscured from the public consciousness.
Having roots in, but eventually developing distinct from the First
Nations, there is the Chican@, and Puerto Rican nations/colonies.
Overtime all these domestic colonies subjugated by the settler amerikan
empire have developed thru struggle, and have reached a new and
different phase of colonialism, called neo-colonialism, which can be
characterized by the power structure now formally allowing
representatives of these oppressed peoples to integrate into the
economic, political and military structures, and in many ways act as a
buffer between the ruling class and the masses of neo-colonized
people.
This brings me back to Our discussion on organizing, and political
education. See, depending on what We organizing for, one will require
different political understanding. Fanon says,
“A political informed [person in a colonial situation] is someone who
knows that a local dispute is not a crucial confrontation between [them]
and [the system]”
“It is the repeated demonstrations for their rights and the repeated
labor disputes that politicize the masses.” (3)
So basically what Frantz Fanon is saying here is that first one must
understand they are indeed colonized, and this understanding disallows
them from settling for any ol’ concession that can come from a ‘local
dispute’. And here when he says local, We can put it in Our immediate
context and understand it to mean, ‘prison struggles’.
What does this mean? It essentially means that We utilize, and in
fact manufacture these ‘repeated demonstrations for their/our rights’ as
a means to politicize the masses. However, if We are organizing the
masses utilizing such demonstration alone We run into a few pitfalls.
The one which i’ll deal with here can be understood by the old saying,
“Be careful what you ask for you just might get it.” So in Our context,
in the prison movement, what happens to the momentum of the masses, of
the people as a whole if We as organizers manufacture a or a few
demonstrations and the administration actually concedes? If the masses
don’t understand the complexity of Our situation, that We’re colonized,
dehumanized, an alienated sub-class, the dregs of the society, and that
not only must these realities change, We must change within Ourselves,
and We must take part in changing these realities, then the masses the
people will quit the struggle after what they’ve perceived to be
success, and they’ll resume their normal ways of existence. This pattern
is counter-productive to the cause of revolution. We must at all times
possible keep the masses active, and that activity pertaining to the
struggle. Fanon said, “The colonized subject is at constant risk of
being disarmed by any sort of concession.”(4)
So an understanding of what Our issues are, colonialism,
neo-colonialism or racism, or individual wrong decision making, will
determine the strategies and tactics We take moving forward. If We begin
Our study of literature proceeding from the perspective that We’re
colonized nations of people, We study how anti-colonial struggles have
developed, failed and triumphed around the world. Furthermore We realize
that unless an action fundamentally eradicates Our colonial existence
than it is only a reform and does not solve Our fundamental problem(s)
which stem from Our thwarted development under neo-colonialism. Thus We
don’t even seek certain reforms, or concessions, and the ones We do are
to advance Our strategic goal.
The question now becomes again HOW to maintain the masses attention
before, during, and after demonstrations? The answer leads us to
ORGANIZATION. Those who have a study level of political vision must take
the initiative in forming real organized organizations. Within these
organizations leaders should allow for activities to be carried out by
the rank & file and must be sure that activities assigned to a
comrade are in alignment with the talents, interests, and abilities of
said comrade. In this way one keeps the masses involved and engaged. If
able weekly or bi-weekly meetings should be established. Minutes should
be kept of the meetings, meaning, write down what you’re doing, what
you’re talking about, what are the plans going forward, etc. At said
meetings each comrade should have a progress report, which entails what
they’ve been doing since the previous meeting.
If a comrade can draw, they should be assigned something to draw. If
a comrade can write, they should be assigned something to write. If a
comrade has a typewrite they should be tasked with typing up the
documents of the group. In fact it is good to take up one project that
the entire collective can attribute to. Say a pamphlet, of course you
need writers, We need art work, and We’ll need a typist, We’ll need some
donations of stamps to circulate it to publishers, and in this way every
one not only feels involved, but more importantly feels that
immeasurable feeling of accomplishment. In understanding the
complexities of Our class (lumpen) We must understand a lot of us have
not accomplished much of anything in the way of real world
accomplishments. A lot of us have been caged, stagnated in a state of
arrested development, since Our pre-teen and teen years, and thus are
persynally under-developed in many ways. This feeling of accomplishment
motivates and inspires one to continue to chase that good feeling, and
particularly when the feeling is derived from doing something
productive, it overtime alters a persyn internally, and this is what We,
as revolutionaries especially within the lumpen class want most.
Organizations in their many varieties are the vehicles of the people
and their struggle. Vanguard elements must seek to organize all aspects
of the people’s struggle, all aspects of the people’s lives under their
leadership and influence. This doesn’t mean everyone has to or will be a
member of a particular leading organizational body. What it means is
that organization must make itself seen & heard & felt in each
aspect of the people’s lives. The musician they listen to should be
expressing some theme derived from the organization. The farmer should
have the organization’s line on collectivizing agriculture and land. The
prisoner and their family should know that the prisoner, if deemed
capable can/will have a place of refuge, work, and re-humanization with
the organization. The womyn must know she has a group trustworthy and
capable to care for her kids collectively, and ensure her access to safe
abortion if necessary. Those in the LGBTQ community must feel at one
with the organization, enabled and empowered.
In a nutshell the proper organization will galvanize the popular
masses of the people, educating and organizing the most capable from
every and all sectors, and from there synthesize the aspirations, and
ambitions of the people’s struggle with practical and concrete measures
to realize these objectives.
With the formation of Texas T.E.A.M.O.N.E., the Texas USW re-branded,
We have formed the vehicle for the Texas prisoner’s struggle. We have
thus far established multiple wings which can/will be used to activate
the stored away genius of the masses. We have the legal wing for those
writ-writing jailhouse lawyers, a space for like minded cats to put
their heads together to attack certain aspects of the system that can
help us better build the movement. We have established, in its early
stages, a wimmins & LGBTQ wing, which is again an avenue for certain
people to step up and utilize what they already know how to do, in
concert with the rest of the organized body to get what We want. We’ve
established the Worker’s wing a lane where people around the state can
collectively struggle for worker’s rights, and incorporate those
struggles with the others and in combination gain bigger gains…We’ve
established and/or influenced the establishment of numerous committees
with the members therein playing roles in the ‘wings’ mentioned above.
In all this We’ve done well in applying lessons learned from
MIM(Prisons), and some of Our own experiences, thus synthesizing theory
& practice.
It must be said however that We have made many mistakes. We began
organizing as Fanon said, around demonstrations. We learned in practice,
some of us without ever having read Fanon, that the masses, and
Ourselves could easily get complacent after concessions are made. The
mistake came by not initially focusing on ideo-theoretical questions. We
had to learn that the truth of the matter that prior to any organization
the people in question must sit down and individually intake
information, after a certain amount of information has been accumulated
they must come together and discuss their findings and thoughts,
establish their points of unity, modes of organization, and other such
matters. Of course this isn’t to say that all organizations come
together like this. Many take on a more spontaneous approach to
development and this approach is observed in their style of work.
The re-occurring theme will always be political education, the need
for it will never cease, and the need to bring all the people to an
active level of consciousness, that is a level where they can be/are
active in the struggle.
In Our campaign to end RHU, it was selectively chosen for a multitude
of reasons. One of which is to show & prove We can shut it down if
& when We organize Ourselves and the people correctly. Because of
conditions that prevail in long-term isolation, many of the most radical
and politically astute people are in or have been in long-term
isolation, if We could multiply those types of elements, and then get
them out on the pop city We can make conditions more conductive to
politicizing more and more prisoners sending more and more of these to
the outside. To illustrate the contradiction that despite the various
levels of illegality present within the solitary confinement apparatus,
it still continues, and yet We’re the so-called criminals. There is of
course the fact that if We can eliminate the punitive answer for dissent
then We leave the enemy with little recourse once Our collective
resistance picks up. In this way We take a tool out of their tool kit.
However, the underlying goal is simply to shut seg down, what if they
just capitulated and gave us what We wanted? What becomes of the
struggle then? IF that was Our actual GOAL and not a MEANS TO AN END,
then Our entire struggle would have been defeated, at least temporarily,
not by bullets, or bombs, but by sugar-coated bullets, by concessions,
by reforms, which weaken the intensity of contradictions rather than
increase them. Mastering this delicate balance will determine the
successes and failures of Our organizing methods.
“At first disconcerted, they then realize the need to explain and
ensure the colonized’s consciousness does not get bogged down. In the
meantime the war goes on, the enemy organizes itself, gathers strength
and preempts the strategy of the colonized. The struggle for national
liberation is not a question of bridging the gap in one giant stride.
The epic is played out on a difficult, day-to-day basis and the
suffering endured far exceeds that of the colonial period. Down in the
towns the colonists have apparently changed. Our people are happier.
They are respected. A daily routine sets in, and the colonized engaged
in struggle, the people who must continue to give it their support,
cannot afford to give in. They must not think the objective has already
been achieved. When the actual objectives of the struggle are described,
they must not think they are impossible. Once again, clarification is
needed and the people have to realize where they are going and how to
get there. The war is not one battle but a succession of local
struggles, none of which, in fact, is decisive.” (5)
We’ve articulated previously that one’s method to organization is
logically dependent upon one’s goals, and also one’s circumstances or
conditions. It is Our view that the conditions and circumstances being
what they currently are in North amerika, the lumpen-prisoner class is a
highly dynamic entity. This class, Our class is also a vacillating
class, meaning its members can be like see-saws, moving from one side
(revolutionary) to another (reactionary) as their emotions and whims
take them. However, We assert that the other classes of North amerika
have become so bourgeoisified that the social vehicles for social
revolution are so slim to none that the last objectively repressed class
in amerika, the class that still has little to no stake in the bourgeois
democracy, is the lumpen.
We’ve reached this conclusion by analyzing the social forces and
classes within North amerikan society. Observing their material benefits
of being cozied up to their bourgeoisie. We’ve observed how and why
social movements only advance so far, being largely unwilling, or
sometimes unable to carry the struggle to higher levels, due to a
certain level of comfort in the status quo. And We logically look to Our
own class and see that these factors, though still present are vastly
diminished. Therefore, arriving at this class analysis We say that it is
most conductive to Our goal of social revolution to invest time and
resources into the lumpen in order to politicize them, and that
investment should be in proportion to the classes potential to lean
towards a revolutionary line and practice.
Now We reach the basic question, how do we maximize the dynamic
potential of this vacillating lumpen class? How do We ensure that the
majority of lumpen are progressive, neutral, or all the way
revolutionary and not objective enemies of the people? The answer again
points to ORGANIZATION. The only way to maximize the people’s initiative
in general and the lumpen in particular is to formulate them into
tightly organized units/groups. The lumpen struggle is a class struggle,
and thus We must organize the First World Lumpen on a class basis.
What does this mean, what does this look like? What is a class? There
is often mention of the prisoner class, or a particular class of
prisoners. However, very rarely do comrades utilize class in a Communist
framework.
A ‘Class’ 1) shares a common position in their relation to the means
of production; common economic conditions, relative to their labor and
appropriation of the social surplus; 2) that they must share a separate
way of life and cultural existence; 3) that they must share a set of
interests which are antagonistic to other classes; 4) that they must
share a set of social relations,;i.e. a sense of unity which extends
beyond local boundaries, and constitutes a national bond; 5) that they
must share a corresponding collective consciousness of themselves as a
‘class’, and; 6) they must create their own political organizations, and
pursue their interests as a ‘class’ (6)
We must also clarify that Marx differentiated between a ‘class in
itself’ and a ‘class for itself’. The difference between the two can be
summarized by saying that a class in itself simply shares a common
economic position but lacks the other listed criteria. Whereas a class
for itself is an entity fully organized and meeting all listed
criteria.
Therefore, what We are saying here is that We must organize in a
manner that will bring the lumpen from the level of class in itself, to
the elevated level of a class for itself. Our organization should be
modeled in a way to obtain the collective mobility, ingenuity, and
potential of the lumpen as a whole. We must ‘nationalize’ these
structures, meaning expand them state-to-state, with each one developing
its own relative strength locally.
The next question is how do We get there? How do we reach this point
of mass participation and organization? We’ll quote Fanon here:
“The duty of a leadership is to have the masses on their side. Any
commitment, however, presupposes awareness and understanding of the
mission to be accomplished, in short a rational analysis, no matter how
embryonic.” (7)
Here he stresses the basic conscious political education of the
people. We continue:
“The people should not be mesmerized, swayed by emotion or
confusion. Only [under-developed people] led by a revolutionary elite
emanating from the people can today empower the masses to step out
onto the stage of history.” (8)
I’ve put the above in bold to illuminate certain mistakes We often
make. We often capitulate to the weaknesses of the masses in Our good
intended desire to win them over. One of the weaknesses of this sort is
the masses never-ending desire to be entertained. This desire almost
always precedes from a desire to escape reality, and when done too much
establishes a state of complacency with oppression and exploitation and
undermines revolutionary or productive/progressive activity. When We
reach out to the masses We often make the mistake of trying to move them
into immediate action with a fiery speech, with the showing of the video
of the latest police killing, or whatever We believe may move them.
Although We have good intentions this method has hystorically proven
inadequate for carrying out revolution. Instead, because it relies on
emotions, which fluctuate, the activity it renders, if it renders
activity at all, is necessarily fluctuating, and vacillating.
We can see this in real time if We observe the ebbs and flows of
social movements in North amerika. George Floyd’s taped murder shook
people emotionally. It awakened pent up anger and frustration from many
sectors. People took that, and nothing else, no political education, no
political organization, no political vision, only anger and frustration
into their protests, and rebellions, and uprisings. Soon, the only
people left in the streets were politicized people. Anarchists,
Socialists, Abolitionists, and this sort. The masses however, had long
since retreated back into the comforts of their amerikan life of escape,
and leisure, isolating what was then allowed to be percieved as
extremist/terrorist elements.
This what Fanon calls the ‘weakness of spontaneity’ showed its face.
We must learn from this. In the quote above the ‘under-developed people’
are those masses of North amerikans. They reside in the land of excess,
material excess, but the land of political sleep-walkers. These are the
people Fanon says must be led by a REVOLUTIONARY elite. Now what does he
mean by this? Because of the under-developed state of the people’s
sociopolitical consciousness, those cadre elements who’ve struggled to
grasp the complex concepts of political-economy, and revolutionary
theory, although not desiring to be perceived as an elite, meaning above
the rest, they actually do represent a higher stage of development, and
in that context ONLY are they ‘elite’. The key phrase of the quote is
the necessity that these ‘elite’ emanate from the people, meaning they
must be one of their own, or perceived as such. The cadre-organizer must
take care to balance its level of understanding with the level of the
masses. There will be a contradiction between these masses and the
politicized persyn, there should be, but this should not be an
antagonistic contradiction. The people should be able to look to you for
example, not look at you in disdain. As one might do to someone who
thinks their shit don’t stink. Now we move to exactly HOW does these
cadres, EMPOWER THE MASSES,
“…On the condition that We vigorously and decisively reject the
formation of a national bourgeoisie, a caste of privileged individuals.
To politicize the masses is to make the nation (or class) in its
totality a reality for every citizen. To make the experience of the
nation (or class) the experience of every citizen.” (9)
“Only the massive commitment by men and wimmin to judicious and
productive tasks gives form and substance to this consciousness.”
(10)
“No leader, whatever their worth, can replace the will of the people,
and the national government, before concerning itself with international
prestige, must first restore dignity to all citizens, furnish
their minds, fill their eyes with human things and develop a human
landscape for the sake of its enlightened and sovereign
inhabitants.” (11)
It is Our intention as USW leaders in Texas, as Tx T.E.A.M.O.N.E.
cadre, to have Our organization act as a vehicle to organize and
mobilize and educate the masses of lumpen in North amerika. We hope you
will be inspired to join us.
Sources:
1) Wretched of the Earth, Frantz Fanon, pg.138,
chapt.3
2) Black Liberation Army Political Dictionary,
pg.4
3) Wretched of the Earth, Frantz Fanon, pg.63
chapt.2
4) ibid, pg.90, chapt.2
5) ibid, pg.90, chapt.2
6) see; Karl Marx, The 18th Brumaire; also Karl Marx, The
Holy Family;also, Meditations On Frantz Fanon’s Wretched of the Earth,
James Yaki Sayles, pg. 286
7) Wretched of the Earth, Frantz Fanon, pg.140,
chapt.3
A comrade responded to the article “Oh So
You Woke” in ULK 73:
“In this article the author criticizes the likes of Angela Davis and
John Lewis. neither Ms. Davis nor Mr. Lewis were agents of propaganda
for the bourgeois as the author implies, but rather they were committed
to the struggle and spent many years on the front lines. As far as
penetrating the police and other arms of state imperialism/control,
someone is going to fill those roles. Is it better us or them? WE must
attack the status quo from multiple fronts – from the inside as well as
the outside. WE need more Angela Davises and John Lewises.”
I do agree with the comrade that WE do need to attack the status quo
from multiple fronts but when one of our own lumpen falls into the lines
of reformism and revisionism while on the road of revolution or
liberation, instead of being a die hard non-compromising, non-settling,
give-me-death-if-I-can’t-have-real-life-liberation revolutionary like
Fred Hampton, Bunchy Carter and the many fore Fathers and fore Mothers
of our lumpen communities, who died and were imprisoned so that the
eternal fire of Freedom, Justice and Equality will never lose its light
and intensity in the surviving generations and their children. So they
can fight on until that day comes in entirety. Then one has to ask the
question … who do you work for?
If WE as a First World lumpen and Third World proletarian
revolutionaries have more individuals like Angela Davis & John
Lewis, We’ll never fulfill the S.O.P.’s of the UFPP. We’ll be in a state
of Reformism and Revisionism, being closely intertwined with
imperialism/capitalism instead of overthrowing it.
First and foremost Angela Davis is a major reformist, she was a part
of the Communist Party, U$A, where the CPU$A was about that Real Life
revolution before the 1940’s but by the 1960’s all their members that
took inspiration from Mao Zedong had left the party. After the attempt
of Jonathan Jackson of freeing his older brother George Jackson, Fleeta
Drumgo and John Clutchette (Soledad Brothers) at Marin County Courthouse
in San Rafael, CA, was then Angela Davis charged with aiding the
attempted escape and placed on the FBI’s most wanted list due to her
close correspondence with George Jackson. She was found not guilty after
her case was severed from the other defendants like Ruchell “Cinque”
Magee who is still locked up in these Koncentration Kamps, while the
rally call of the masses at the time was “Free Angela Davis and ALL
POLITICAL PRISONERS!” Then in 1973 she founded the CP front the National
Alliance Against Racism and Political Repression that REFUSED to come
defend Black Liberation Army members facing prison time.
Later on in her “revolutionary” life she got back into academia while
still being a huge influence for the CPU$A, where she ran twice for Vice
President of the U$A. She supported Democratic presidential candidates,
like Joe Biden, to pressure them when in office to the CPU$A’s
Khrushchevite peaceful transition into socialism agenda or the Pac-Man
politics (biting away at imperialism until it collapses on itself). She
also co-founded the Committees of Correspondence with a moniker that
points to the CPU$A’s notion that “Communism is 20th Century
Americanism.” In her writings and university lectures in the academic
realm, she promoted the CPU$A’s reformism and postmodern politics, the
basis of this day and age concept of “Abolition,” and not the dire need
of armed revolution.
John Lewis is basically the same in the sense with the Pac-Man
politics, Abolition reformist movement and post-modernism. Also one of
the leaders of the Civil Rights Movement and a leader in the peaceful
nonviolent strategy of protest and civil unrest. The “Woke” U.$.
leftists, who are the petty-bourgeoisie, praises Angela Davis and John
Lewis as saints and the imperialist aided in placing them on those
pedestals to be praised by the masses, because they knew with the
ideologies and concepts that these two individuals promote will do no
real harm to their oppressive establishment. Point proven in the last
summer series of protest after the murder of George Floyd and many
others.
What real change came from that civil unrest in a real revolutionary
way? It’s because of Angela Davis and John Lewis that We have to
re-educate and un-brainwash the masses from the concepts and ideologies
of Reformism, Revisionism, Postmodernism and the Pac-Man politics with
the concepts and ideologies of Marxism, Leninism and Maoism to gain
liberation from imperialism through armed resistance and revolution.
Reason why it was stated that they are agents of the imperialist
propaganda in the article “Oh, So You Woke.” Whether it was intentional
or not they step out of the realm of being First World lumpen to the
realm of the petty-bourgeoisie and benefited from the transition also.
It pays to be famous and in the limelight of the pop culture
revolutionary contest, right? Even after being on the front lines where
they witness first hand so many of our souljas and leaders lose their
lives, placed in exile and/or imprisoned, they settled for positions of
comfort for self and appeared to be in the struggle still, instead of
being ten toes down in the mud with WE overthrowing
imperialism/capitalism to establish socialism, and later communism,
nation- and world-wide.
DON’T FALL FOR THE POP CULTURE REVOLUTIONARY HYPE COMRADES.
by Wiawimawo of MIM(Prisons) August 2021 permalink
Nancy Pelosi promotes child tax credits to Chican@s in Califaztlan, but
is another pay out the answer to the oppression of youth? Photo by:
Mario Tama
One thing we heard from those saddened by the
police murder of 16-year-old Ma’Khia Bryant was that she didn’t get
to have a childhood.(1) While nation is most certainly the primary
factor that led to the cop, Nicholas Reardon, shooting Bryant, we think
gender oppression, and in particular youth oppression, had a lot to do
with Bryant ending up where she did on that fateful day.
When people speak of being able to have a childhood, we may think of
a time of fun, carefree play, no work, no oppression, etc. Of course
most people in the world don’t have much of a childhood in this sense.
But in the United $tates many do. So already we see there is some
hierarchy involved in this idea of having a childhood, at least under
imperialism. We see this hierarchy as the realm of gender because it is
a question of leisure time and not labor time, which is the subject of
class (see Clarity
on What Gender is). But there is also the question of why we must
separate our lives into periods of fun and play and periods of work and
oppression? And why do we have oppression at all? And how did work
become a bad thing?
To answer these question briefly, the relations of production under
capitalism are what alienates people from their labor today, so that
they feel their labor time is not their time. But as “adults,” most must
spend the majority of their waking hours in labor time. While some
people want those like Bryant to have the purist, most care-free
childhood as possible, we are working towards a whole life that is
enjoyable and fulfilling. And we doubt that is possible without a
healthy dose of productive labor. The exclusion of children from work
for over 100 years in the United $tates has left them with no productive
role to play in society, leading to alienation and lack of worth.(2)
This alienation and lack of self-worth is reinforced by abuse, and leads
to destructive behavior.
As Greyhound points out in eir article
on Ma’Khia Bryant, the Soviet Union provided family for orphaned
youth through the productive life of the commune. The communes did not
work kids to the bone to squeeze out the maximum profits as the
capitalists once did in the United $tates, and still do in most of the
world. Below we look at some attempts by capitalist Amerika to provide
for youth and why they cannot get at the source of youth oppression as
well as socialist experiments that have.
Child Credits Pay the
Patriarch
With sheltering-in-place during the pandemic and no in-persyn
schooling for most children, the question of childcare has received much
attention in the United $tates. The answer from the bourgeoisie came in
the form of child credits. Amerikan families began receiving these
payments in mid-July 2021, for a total of $3000-3600 per family over the
next 6 months.
These credits are a market-based attempt to address the problem of
adults in the nuclear family spending large sums of money to have their
children cared for when they are working or otherwise occupied. These
credits put more power in the hands of the adults who get the money over
the lives of the children who qualify them for these payments. Money for
those who struggle to make ends meet can certainly mean less stressful
conditions for their children. The logic makes sense, it is just a
backwards, half-ass approach. By the 1960s in socialist China, all
children had guaranteed care that was collectively run and offered ways
for youth to voice their concerns and avoid abusive situations. This was
in a country where a decade or two earlier children were basically sold
into slavery. This is the kind of radical change the youth need, that a
profit-based system can’t provide.
Punishing Sex
Offenders to Save the Family
It is very evident that affection, support and trust in our lives as
young people have significant effects on our health throughout our
lives.(3) Lack of positive social relationships and experiences has been
linked to drug addiction and correlates strongly with imprisonment.
Therefore this is a topic very dear to the hearts of many of our
readers.
One way we see this manifest in a more reactionary politic of the
imprisoned masses is in the strong, often violent attitudes towards sex
offenders in prison culture. This sentiment exists outside prison of
course, but became part of the prison culture because of the
concentration of convicted sex offenders there. As we’ve addressed in
the past, this reactionary politic is problematic on the one hand in
that it is allowing
the state to decide who our enemies are, that in many cases the
actions that led to these cases are mild compared to many
non-sex-offender charges and in some cases the people are completely
innocent.(4) In the United $tates, white males and females, as a group,
have treated the Black male as a sexual animal that must be controlled,
sometimes by fake rape charges and imprisonment. In other words, some
who are convicted as sex offenders are actually the victims of gender
oppression, as well as national oppression.
A second reason we say the anti-sex offender politic is reactionary
is that it doesn’t offer any real solutions to the problem of the sexual
abuse of children. It is an example of why MIM always opposed the slogan
“Think global, act local.” If you think globally about this problem of
child abuse, and act locally by ostracizing or even attacking those you
come in contact with who have (or who you believe have) abused children,
you haven’t changed anything if the patriarchy remains. You can confirm
this with crime statistics, or just the fact that we live in a society
where we know this problem is still prevalent.
Addressing child abuse requires systemic change as the Chinese
instituted during their experiment in socialism. Young people need a
different system that supports them with things we know people need to
grow up healthy; mentally and physically. These things can not be
offered on conditions or the whims of one or two adults who control the
child’s life. As they say, “it takes a village to raise a child.” And
people who are serious about reducing child abuse need to work to build
those villages and build them in ways that give young people full access
to information, a wide variety of adult support people, including those
in power, and access to other youth without the interference of adults.
The village should also give repercussions to youth for “bad behavior.”
These repercussions should be consistent in order to provide the youth
with social guidance and never be used by individual adults to get what
they want from children or to take out their frustrations from a bad
day. The oversight of a more village-based model must prevent adults
from doing such things.
Different Models
What the bourgeoisie offers in place of the village is more cash to
the patriarch. These cash incentives make single-parent homes more
viable. But single-parent homes are some of the easiest places for
adults to molest and abuse children.
The reactionary approach to child abuse (imprisonment and violence)
also reinforces the patriarchy, where strong adult men must protect
youth from other adult men by physical assault. One critique of this
line points out how it views the rights of children the same as the
rights of animals in that they must be granted and enforced from the
outside.
“pseudo feminists… [accept a] zoological implication that child abuse
is going to go on forever, as if… child abuse were inherent in the humyn
species, and at the same time external to humyn social relations, like
animals.”(5)
The Maoist counter-point then is that child abuse is a humyn
relationship that is found within the patriarchal family structure. It
is part of the central problem of oppression of groups of people by
other groups that we aim to resolve through ongoing revolutionary
struggle under the dictatorship of the proletariat. Rather than
punishing sex offenders to save the family and “protect our children”,
we must replace the nuclear family with communal child-rearing, and
empower young people to criticize others in order to stop those who
might try to abuse children.
Putting child care in the public sphere will do a lot to undermine
the conditions of child abuse. But it does not eliminate the biases of
the adult population, especially those that grew up in the old
capitalist ways, from miseducating or mistreating youth as a group. And
we know that institutional living like group homes and prisons, where
many adults are involved in “care” for the youth, are rife with abuse.
For these reasons youth must have ways of coming together as a group and
voicing their interests as a group, even enforcing their interests as a
group in contradiction to the adults that they depend on. l Ruth Sidel
produced an in-depth report on Women and Childcare in China as
well as in the Soviet Union and the kibbutz in I$rael. In one Chinese
school, when asked what you’d do if you found a sick child on the
street, a 6-year-old child responded: “i’d bring them medicine and
water.” Sidel was surprised the child would not find an authority figure
first.(6) What a striking difference in world views between socialist
children and how most of us grew up in this country. These children
still spent most of their days singing and playing and doing things that
we all did in school. Yet, they were taught differently, taught to act
and be self-empowered as soon as they were able to physically complete
the tasks that might be demanded of them, like bringing another child
water, or possibly organizing resistance to an abusive adult.
Some reading this will find the youth helping other youth not so
strange because they raised their siblings at a young age. This is
another way that peoples’ “childhoods are lost” in our culture; having
to take care of other children as a child. It is not that care for those
younger than you is inappropriate to carry out as a child, but that you
need the support of a community to do so in a way that is not oppressive
to your own life and most supportive to those you help care for.
According to the story from Ma’Khia Bryant’s grandmother, the
conflict that had occurred among two groups of foster children was over
perceived disrespect to the foster mother due to the lack of chores
getting done. Most likely the situation was more complicated. But we see
how there can be a disagreement over the labor responsibilities of
members of a family that leads to violent conflict. This would be very
unlikely when people have clear responsibilities, clear and consistent
consequences that are enforced by the group for not meeting those
responsibilities, and ways to communicate up front with both adults and
youth about the roles and treatment of others.
The Roles of Youth in
Society
In discussing Ma’khia Bryant’s childhood, we must address the fact
that she was 16 years old when she was murdered by a cop because of this
conflict. Other 16-year-olds in the area could have banded together to
take revenge on Reardon for shooting her. Most members of the Black
Panther Party joined in their teens. Bobby Hutton was murdered by the
pigs emself at age 17 while on an armed patrol of the police. Sixteen is
much more physically developed than six, and would mostly only be
limited by legal restrictions like being able to drive or purchase fire
arms.
Fifteen was the age when members of the Fuerzas Armadas
Revolucionarias de Colombia - Ejército del Pueblo(FARC-EP) could engage
in armed actions.(7) As the struggle of the Eritrean People’s Liberation
Front(EPLF) advanced, they established the Fitewerari to train male
youth 14 to 16 years old and females of all ages. They found that
training the adult females separate from adult males helped in both
groups overcoming the traditional gender roles they had been inculcated
with. The youth did not have these challenges, at least not to the same
degree.
“In addition to literacy education, political and military training,
and running their daily affairs, they participate in production,
adhering to the EPLF’s correct revolutionary principle of ‘integrating
education with production.’ They practice criticism and self-criticism
to rectify mistakes, develop work and strengthen comradely solidarity.
Upon finishing training, they are assigned to the different EPLF units
and departments to carry on the struggle on all fronts.”(8)
Much has been put into the idea that a humyn’s prefrontal cortex is
growing rapidly up until about age 25. The implication being that you
can’t quite trust the judgement of those under 25. But this is only one
data point, of a biological phenomenon we still barely understand. And
along with this data point comes some implications in how younger people
are willing to go against the status quo and can change their ways
faster. We look to history, to see the transformative power of youth
movements, rather than follow current trends in biological determinism
based in preliminary studies of the brain.
Towards a World Without
Oppression
When Maoists talk about gender, we are talking about a system of
power in the realm of leisure time; the patriarchy. In that system,
youth are generally part of the gender-oppressed. Though in the
imperialist countries, they are likely part of a gender aristocracy, a
child aristocracy, particularly those who have access to the idealized
carefree childhood.
Similar to the wimmin in bourgeois society, the bourgeois children
are relegated outside of labor and exclusively to leisure time. This
leisure time is meanwhile structured to serve the pleasure of the man
and the interests of capitalism overall. These groups being relegated to
leisure time reinforces the divide between leisure time and labor time
in society mentioned above. This is one reason why it is hard to imagine
undoing gender hierarchy without first undoing capitalism, which would
eliminate the sharp divide between labor time and leisure time. Through
this process, gender will cease to be so separate from class struggle as
it is in the bourgeoisified First World countries. Then our lives as
individuals will be more complete, as will our communities.
Youth liberation is part of and dependent on the struggle to end
capitalism and imperialism. Youth don’t need more paternalism, they need
a supportive village to learn from and the freedom to self-actualize
themselves without the fetters of oppression that shape our lives
today.
“There is nothing mystical, elusive or hidden about real working
class consciousness. It is the political awareness that the exploiting
class and its state must be fought… that the laboring masses of the
world have unity in their need for socialism…” (J.Sakai,
Settlers)
It is hard for some to accept that only through an actual revolution
against this government and its imperialist allies can this world even
hope for peace. In addition, any building, calls for unity or worse
still, claims of socialism or revolution that is not in the service of
this objective is actually in the service of capitalism-imperialism,
i.e. counter-revolution.
Mao said: it is only when there is class struggle that there can be
philosophy. And to discuss epistemology apart from practice is a waste
of time. Additionally it is only through social practice that we can
talk about correct or incorrect ideas at all. Recently bourgeois media
have made a big deal of gun violence which is an obvious response to BLM
and Defund movements. Additionally, we are all aware of the unprovoked
attacks on Asians and now the media and politicians are demanding Cuba
not crack down on protest and a promise to keep an eye on Haiti. However
there is or has been much protest regarding all these issues yet no real
consciousness being transformed. Why?
As J. Sakai states, it is due to the failure to identify our class
enemies. Also as Mao stated, our philosophy can only be forged via class
struggle. However, the reason I mentioned the above latest media spins
is to remind us the enemy sadly never forgets to engage in the class
struggle. Obviously that means we (the people) are being routed.
Presumably most of the hit squad that murdered Moise in Haiti were
trained by the U.$. Rumors are that at least one was previously on its
informant pay roll. Cuba is heavily embargoed. Trump alone put 243
additional restrictions on it and Obama and Biden very much kept their
imperialist boots on its neck. So Cuba, regardless of how spontaneous
the protest is, is very much in the cross hairs of European settlers and
their flunkies cross hairs.
When we studied Black nationalism a common refrain was an alleged
pronouncement on the entrance of an ancient school of thought in Egypt,
“Man, Know thyself.” Regardless of if this is true it simply meant for
us to know we had content and value. However, it wasn’t particularly
revolutionary, nor even dialectical. And for someone who never
experienced slavery it would have been a cliche. However, a more
dialectical saying would’ve been first to drop the “man”, and just:
“Know yourself and know your enemies.” This is dialectical materialism,
this is to understand the class struggle and enter the fight on the
right side. I say that because far too many “claim revolution” but don’t
participate in any revolutionary activities.
Social-imperialism is another way capitalism-imperialism
discombobulates our class by getting us to believe most people here in
the belly of the beast are “lost” and can be won over to revolution;
that they are supporting the parasitism of empire only because they
don’t know any better. This wastes time and it wastes resources. I was
listening to Cat Brooks, a “freedom fighter” who is bent on defunding
the police. On a 5 way call a brother who did 15 years was saying his
org don’t work with the pig at all, but Brooks said they do, “but only
limited” i.e. they have a purpose. These calls go along with $15/hr a
minimum wage or like Raymond Lotta says $10/hr is a grueling wage. These
are conscious calls of the labor aristocracy and my point here is that
it’s not just Euro-settlers who are labor aristocracy in ideology, as
well as practice. This is why commercial hip hop currently is not a
vehicle for change.
However, regardless if these people get more people to pander to
their line or not and regardless of if the imperialists share more of
their wealth or not this only serves to help imperialism fuck over the
people even more. Mao said “utopian socialists” are always trying to
persuade the bourgeoisie to be more charitable. Mao said emphatically,
“this won’t work” and that it is necessary to rely on class struggle of
the proletariat. Clearly this means in this day and age
anti-imperialism, self-determination struggles, and a clear line
denoting our class enemies and their optimistic flunkies who claim we’re
all in this together and people will care about us once they get to know
us – must be drawn.
Some say it’s too hard, but as I stated it simply is not. Our “genius
does not depend on one person or a few people. It depends on a party,
the party which is the vanguard of the proletariat. Genius is dependent
on mass line, on collective wisdom,” as succinctly stated by Mao. It is
impossible to always be in the trenches together as we deserve, but it
is a form of class struggle and perfecting this definitely is a blow
back against empire.