In response to a letter from MIM(Prisons) struggling over some
apparent points of disagreement, we received this commentary on movement
strategy and tactics.
We believe in having a political branch and a military branch. It’s
nothing wrong with being political, it is needed in the fight against
imperialism and capitalism. So you doing public building of opinions and
creating independent institutions is good. That’s what nonviolent people
do who are coffee house revolutionaries. It’s nothing wrong with being
coffee house revolutionaries. Everybody has a position to maintain.
That’s why I support you and a few other people we deal with support
you. So do your prisoner support work and lumpen organizing. That’s a
good thing which I support. If me and others did not support it we would
not contact you.
To my second point, I and others believe that MIMs and us can learn from
each other. It’s not about just what MIMs can share or teach us. It’s
about what we can share and teach MIMs also. It’s about real uniting for
a common purpose against a common enemy. We call this networking,
sharing lines, etc. Not being forced to accept someone’s line, but
respecting it. We know war is fought using different strategy and
tactics. We are not pushing anyone away who is trying to bring about
revolution and establish socialism.
That’s what I and some others think MIMs do when they criticize people
who are socialist or revolutionaries but belong to other orgs. MIMs see
their way is the only right way. Not everybody believes that. That’s
what Christians and Muslims believe and do and look at them, they fight
each other over who is right but they have some things in common with
slight differences. If you seek unity, stop criticizing other socialist
revolutionaries and unite on common grounds. If something is expressed
different than what you believe, you can state how you view something
then leave it up to the people to decide what strategy and tactics they
want to follow.
Everybody is not political, some people are militant and are about
militarism. We accept MIMs being political. We want to share militarism
spirit or values. For we are truly on the battlefield with weapons.
People are dying and getting locked up. We come from the battlefield
from street orgs, etc. We risk and sacrifice our lives every day. While
some are scared to die or get out on the front lines, that’s where we
are at on the battlefield or on these plantations. We are not
nonviolent, we are violent. We contact MIMs so we can work together not
apart. We are about unity for real, not about if you believe as me I
unite with you.
There are white nationalist groups called the 3% who believe that 3% of
the population went to war and won the revolutionary war in 1776. These
white groups form militias and are militarized. They train for war. They
building a militarized institution while MIMs are being political. All
we’re saying is how you claim to be a vanguard and you’re not training
and educating people to form militarized units instead of just spreading
public opinion on socialism. If y’all just going to spread public
opinion okay do that. I and others think at least work with those who
are working on building militarized units who fight instead of just talk
and read. Everybody don’t have to do the same thing.
So just so there be no misunderstanding, I and others respect your line
and strategy. Keep up the good work. You’re just not militant from what
we can tell. People who are militant are willing to support you, why
don’t you support them and show some real unity? Then you can say you’re
a vanguard and are real revolutionaries. What’s the point in being
political if you have no military to enforce your laws, beliefs, etc. So
that is why I write you to support you. The question is do you support
militant revolutionaries or are you just a big study group who act
elitist? Are you for the people or just people who are under your line
and strategy?
MIM(Prisons) responds: This letter is particularly relevant to
this issue of ULK focused on movement tactics. The writer raises
some good points about unity that we want to address.
First, to clarify, MIM(Prisons) does not claim to be a vanguard party at
this time, which is implied by this comrade saying we need an army to
enforce our laws, beliefs, etc. We recognize the need for a vanguard
party for the defeat of imperialism by the communists, but the strategic
defeats of the movement over the recent decades have led us to conclude
that cell organizing is more effective and appropriate to rebuild the
movement. However, we would not split with anyone who disagrees on this
point, it is a relatively short term strategic question. We do aim to be
part of the vanguard movement, with the most advanced and correct line
and practice.
With that said, we agree with this writer that it is important to build
unity across revolutionary organizations that are working on different
anti-imperialist strategies and tactics. The question of when to take up
armed struggle, and even when to build an army for that battle, is also
a strategic one. This is something that is relatively longer term,
i.e. you don’t build an army today and disband it tomorrow. But it’s
definitely not a disagreement over political line: we agree that the
only way to overthrow imperialism is through armed struggle. The
bourgeoisie won’t give up their wealth and power peacefully. We are also
not nonviolent. The disagreement is one of strategic timing, not method.
So are we just coffee house revolutionaries afraid of or refusing to see
the importance of armed struggle? Our analysis of recent history in the
United $tates reveals the murder or imprisonment of revolutionary groups
that have attempted any form of armed struggle, or even just the
collecting of weapons for self-defense, even when this is done
completely within U.$. laws. This study of history has led us to
conclude that we are at the stage of building and educating right now.
We know this will change, but we can’t say when, we just need to be
ready and willing to change when conditions require it.
We do not agree that militarism is to be contrasted with being
political. Rather than see MIM(Prisons) as political and this comrade’s
organization as militarist, we call both groups political. We are both
focused on fighting imperialism. The decision to militarize today or
hold off until conditions are more favorable is a political decision.
And it’s something we should struggle over, because through political
struggle we all learn and grow.
And this brings us to the point of unity. Those who disagree with us on
the appropriate timing of militarizing are well within the
anti-imperialist united front. And we certainly don’t believe that we
are the only holders of truth and cannot learn from others. Quite the
contrary, we learn from our readers, other organizations that we work
with, and even from our enemies. We are regularly publishing in Under
Lock & Key articles explaining changes to our political line
and/or strategy based on things we have learned through practice. And to
be a viable political organization that survives we must always be open
to learning more. But that doesn’t mean we will just accept what other
people tell us without struggling over the facts and interpretations if
we believe they are wrong. Political struggle is not about egos, it is
about learning. We look forward to learning and building with this
comrade and eir organization for many years to come.