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.
Queen D.I.V.A here, I want to speak on why LGBTQ (Lesbian, Gay,
Bisexual, Transgender/transexual, Queer) comrades are treated like shit.
This is my second bid and I’ve seen a lot of love towards my community
but to be totally honest I’ve seen more dislike and hate towards my
community.
Comrades will rather be respectful to a kkkorektions officer than a
homosexual, why? Comrades will rather say good morning with a smile on
their faces to a kkkorektions officer, why? Don’t you guys know these
pigs are the ones throwing your mail away and then telling you that you
didn’t get any, that they will beat your ass and say you assaulted them
and give you a new bid, and that they will deny your visit after your
family just drove 7 hours to see you?
What have LGBTQ comrades done to you? Nothing. We were born different,
that’s it! What if your own flesh and blood son came to you one day and
confessed that he’s gay? Would you disown him? Would you treat him like
you treat imprisoned gays, or would you put your ego, pride and fear to
the side and embrace him?
We are all in this struggle together, let us say “screw what people
think.” A “unit” is something that works together. We’re behind these
walls and fences together so why can’t we stand together? Stop
disrespecting us and you’ll see we’re not your enemies.
MIM(Prisons) responds: This comrade eloquently pushes the United
Front for Peace in Prisons principle of Unity around the question
of sexual orientation and gender identity, elements of the strand of
oppression of gender. We need to look beyond petty differences, and
beyond socialized prejudices around gender. Our movement cannot afford
to be divided along these lines. Instead we need to judge people by
their actions and their political line. Those who side with the pigs,
who feed them information, and who help them by provoking fights and
doing their bidding: those people are our enemies. People who stand up
against the criminal injustice system are our friends. And those who
don’t stand up but refuse to work with the pigs are our friends in need
of a little educating and leadership so that they too will join the
struggle.
As we reflect on the legacy of the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense
(BPP), we are reminded that the struggle for national liberation
continues. Fifty years ago, the Panthers emerged from similar conditions
of national oppression to what we face today. Armed with Maoism and the
gun, Panther leaders Huey P. Newton and Bobby Seale set out to organize
their Oakland community against police brutality and other social
inequalities. And what they accomplished distinguished the BPP as the
greatest revolutionary organization in the hystory of the New
Afrikan/Black liberation struggle.
During its height, the BPP established itself as the vanguard of the
revolutionary movement in the United $tates. Revisionists try to paint
the Panthers as simple nationalists who only wanted to improve their
community. But hystory proves otherwise, because the Panthers’
revolutionary work went beyond the Serve the People programs they
implemented. The BPP was a Maoist party which criticized the bankrupt
ideas of cultural nationalism and Black capitalist reforms. They
attacked revisionism in the Soviet Union, while offering troops to
support the Vietnamese in their struggle to push out the Amerikan
invaders, and upholding the progress of the Great Proletarian Cultural
Revolution in China. It understood that the relationship between the
Euro-Amerikan settler nation and the many oppressed nations internal to
the United $tates was (as it still is today) defined by
semi-colonialism, and that national liberation was the only path
forward. To this end, the Panthers formed strategic alliances and
coalitions that broadened their mass base of support and unity.
Eventually they succeeded in forming Panther chapters in virtually every
major city, precipitating a revolutionary movement of North American
oppressed nations vying for national liberation.
Despite this progress the BPP made serious mistakes, mistakes that
arguably set the movement for national liberation back tremendously.
Even though the Panther leadership adhered to Marxism-Leninism-Maoism
(MLM), they failed to assess the changing landscape of social and
political conditions, which inevitably led them to take up focoist
positions. This error in analysis resulted in security issues as
repression from the U.$. reactionary forces intensified. With J. Edgar
Hoover’s plan to destabilize and neutralize the revolutionary movement
underway, the Panther leadership continued to promote a “cult of
persynality” around Newton instead of democratic centralism.
Consequently, these mistakes placed such intense pressure on the party
that it was unable to overcome the tide of repression.
Ultimately, the point of this article is to honor the revolutionary
legacy of the BPP by demonstrating how the Panther practice is relevant
to our current struggle. For our national liberation struggles to gain
traction we must learn from the successes and failures of the most
advanced revolutionary organization in U.$. hystory.
Fuck the Police!
“The Party was born in a particular time and place. It came into being
with a call for self-defense against the police who patrolled our
communities and brutalized us with impunity.”(1) – Huey P. Newton
There is no greater tragedy for the oppressed nation community than the
unjust murder of one of its own at the hands of the pigs. The impact is
two-fold. On one hand, police brutality demonstrates to members of the
oppressed nation community that there are two sets of rules governing
society, one for the oppressor and one for the oppressed. On the other
hand, it removes all doubt from the minds of oppressed nationals that
their lives are virtually worthless in the eyes of the white power
structure.
This point was just as much a sobering reality during the Panther era as
it is for us today. In The Black Panthers Speak, Phillip S. Foner
cites a 1969 report that captured a snapshot of the police relations
with the Oakland community. It read in part:
“…for the black citizens, the policeman has long since ceased to be – if
indeed he ever was – a neutral symbol of law and order…in the ghetto
disorders of the past few years, blacks have often been exposed to
indiscriminate police assaults and, not infrequently, to gratuitous
brutality…Many ghetto blacks see the police as an occupying army…”(2)
Under these circumstances, the BPP was formed and began to transform the
Oakland community in a revolutionary manner.(3) Newton and Seale
understood that the terrorist actions by the pigs undermined the
oppressed nation community’s ability to improve its conditions. So they
organized armed patrols to observe and discourage improper police
behavior. These unprecedented actions by the Panthers gave them
credibility within the community, particularly as community members
experienced the positive effects brought about by the patrols.
Therefore, when the Panthers engaged in mass activities, such as the
Free Breakfast for Children program, they did so with the full support
of the community.
Naturally, the BPP met resistance from the local and state reactionary
forces. Challenging the Gestapo tactics of the pigs and building
institutions that served the needs of the oppressed was seen as too much
of a threat by and to the white power structure. But the revolutionary
movement had already picked up steam, and, given the momentous energy
and support from the anti-war movement, it was not about to be derailed.
It was upon this platform that the BPP spoke to the oppressed nations
across the United $tates and saw its message resonate and take root
within the consciousness of all oppressed peoples.
Today, we face the same challenge. Whether it’s the pig murder of Denzil
Dowell that mobilized the Panthers into action fifty years ago, or the
more recent pig murder of Jamar Clark this past November, there has been
no significant change in the conditions of national oppression that U.$.
internal semi-colonies are subjected to.
Police brutality continues to keep the oppressed nations from addressing
a system of national oppression and semi-colonialism. But there is an
even more sinister dynamic involved today. Mass incarceration, and the
“War on Drugs” and “War on Crime” rhetoric and policies that fuel it,
further divides the oppressed nation community against itself. With the
lumpen section of these oppressed nation communities criminalized and
incarcerated so too is the revolutionary potential for national
liberation neutralized and restrained. Here, the Panther practice
provides a blueprint for our current struggle in respect to
revolutionary organizing.
Recently, we have seen the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement come into
being in response to the unbridled pig terrorism that occurs across U.$.
oppressed nation communities. So the basis for revolutionary organizing
against the current system exists. Nonetheless, BLM is a reformist
organization that advocates for integration and not liberation. What we
need are Maoist revolutionary organizations – organizations that seek to
build the political consciousness of oppressed nationals through mass
activities and proletarian leadership similar to the Panther practice.
Maoism, not Focoism
Maoism demands that in determining correct revolutionary practice we
must first proceed from an analysis of contradictions. This means that
we must identify the contradiction that is principal to our situation,
and then assess its internal aspects as well as its external
relationships. In contrast, focoism “places great emphasis on armed
struggle and the immediacy this brings to class warfare!”(4) Where
Maoism takes account of the national question in its entirety and pushes
the struggle for national liberation forward according to the prevailing
conditions, focoism seeks to bring about favorable conditions for
national liberation (or revolution) through the actions of a small band
of armed individuals. To date Maoism has informed many successful
people’s wars; focoism, on the other hand, has mostly made the prospect
for revolution much less likely.
In this regard, Newton, in developing the Panther practice, saw the
international situation of the time as favorable to revolutionary
organizing within the United $tates. Given the hystoric Great
Proletarian Cultural Revolution in China representing the furthest
advancement toward communism to this day, the national liberation wars
of Afrika and Asia dealing blows to imperialism, and the Vietnam War
stoking the fire of discontent and rebellion among sections of the white
oppressor nation, Newton was correct in organizing and politicizing U.$.
oppressed nation communities for liberation.
Bloom and Martin explain in their book, Black Against Empire,
that these conditions, in particular the anti-war movement, assisted the
Panthers’ organizing efforts greatly.(5) This coalition between the
Panthers and the Peace movement was so dynamic that U.$. veterans
returning from Vietnam joined the BPP and other revolutionary
organizations. The link between Vietnamese liberation and New Afrikan
liberation (and other U.$. oppressed nation liberation struggles) became
a central point in building political consciousness.
Nonetheless, Newton took eir analysis too far. It is clear that ey
believed the armed struggles abroad were inextricably tied to the U.$.
national liberation struggles. Newton maintained, “As the aggression of
the racist American government escalates in Vietnam, the police agencies
of America escalates the repression of Black people throughout the
ghettos of America.”(6) From this standpoint, Newton assumed that the
police brutality in U.$. oppressed communities created a military
situation, to which a military response from the U.$. revolutionary
movement was appropriate.
Newton’s error was mistaking the weakness of imperialism abroad as
indicative of a weak U.$. imperialist state. Instead of assessing the
changing landscape of social and political conditions, created by a
period of concessions by U.$. imperialists, the Panthers continued to
organize as if the stage of struggle was an armed one.(7) Even when
Newton recognized the dramatic changes and began to adapt, a split
occurred within the Party, as a faction held that revolution was
imminent.(8)
With respect to our current struggle, we are in the stage of building
public opinion and independent institutions of the oppressed. In this
work we must establish a united front of all those who can be united
against imperialism.
Therefore, when we see the
Ferguson
or
Baltimore
protests against pig terrorism descend into scenes of mayhem and
senseless violence we must criticize these methods of resistance. Many
of the individuals who engage in these spontaneous uprisings mistakenly
believe that this will bring about some change or vindicate the wrongs
done to them and their community. The only thing these focoist actions
change, however, is the focus from pig terrorism to people terrorizing
their own community. This basically undermines our ability to organize
and build public opinion in this stage of struggle.
Part of this problem lies in the fact that there is no revolutionary
organization at this time representing these oppressed nation
communities. There is no BPP or Young Lords Party going into these
communities and doing agitation and organizing work. As a result, a lack
of political consciousness prevails among these communities,
underscoring the need for a revolutionary organization.
A Maoist party would guide the U.$. oppressed nations with a concrete
revolutionary practice and strategy. This revolutionary organization
would use MLM study and analysis to determine the correct actions and
methods to take in order to liberate those oppressed nations and avoid
the pitfalls of focoism.
Ultimately, this lesson can be summed up in one sentence: “Maoism warns
that taking up the gun too soon, without the proper support of the
masses, will result in fighting losing battles.”(9)
On the Necessity of Security Culture
Furthermore, the Panthers’ incorrect analysis of conditions that led to
focoist positions eventually compromised the security of the Party as
well. Once the period of concessions began to sap support for the BPP’s
militant posture, FBI head J. Edgar Hoover was able to ratchet up
repression against the Panthers. This was seen most clearly when agent
provocateurs were able to infiltrate and exploit the focoist tendencies
held by some Panthers. Undercover FBI agents would literally join the
BPP and begin to incite other members to engage in criminal activities
or “make revolution.” These repressive measures, their ever-increasing
frequency and intensity, began to take a detrimental toll on the
Panthers.
Make no mistake, since day one of the BPP’s organizing efforts it faced
repression. Armed New Afrikan men and wimmin organizing their community
toward revolutionary ends was intolerable for the white power structure.
However, the anti-war movement created such a favorable climate for
revolutionary organizing that the more reactionary forces attacked the
BPP, the more support the Panthers received, the more its membership
grew and its chapters spread throughout the country.
But when those favorable conditions shifted, the BPP’s strategy didn’t.
The Panthers continued to operate above ground, maintaining the same
militant posture that initially placed them in the crosshairs of
Hoover’s COINTELPRO. Ironically, Newton was well versed in the role of
the Leninist vanguard party. Ey explained that “All real revolutionary
movements are driven underground.”(10) Though, by the time Newton put
this principle into action and attempted to adapt to the changing
situation the Party as a whole was thoroughly divided and beaten down by
wave after wave of relentless repression.
For us, the important point to draw from this lesson is the assessment
of conditions for revolutionary organizing. Because we live in a point
in time where we consume our daily social lives openly through various
social media, it is easy to forget that the reactionaries are observing.
We must therefore place a high priority on security culture as it
pertains to our organizing efforts going forward. In addition, we must
strongly emphasize the importance of avoiding death and prison. A robust
security culture will protect our organizing efforts and dull the blows
of repression that are certain to come.
Currently, we face a strong imperialist state that is more than capable
of disrupting a potential revolutionary movement. This point is
evidenced by the fact that Hoover’s repressive practices are “mirrored
in the far-reaching high-tech surveillance of the US National Security
Agency.”(11) Maintaining a strong revolutionary organization thus
requires us to maintain strong security practices informed by MLM theory
and practice.
Party Discipline over Party Disciple
Hystory is a testament that some revolutionary organizations and
movements have fallen victim to the “cult of persynality.” This is more
true in an imperialist society as bourgeois individualism nurtures a
response in people to associate or reduce organizations and movements to
the characteristics of one persyn. And the BPP was no exception in this
regard.
Newton
was very intelligent, charismatic, and embodied qualities of a true
leader. In truth, ey was a symbol of black power and strength that had
been missing from the New Afrikan nation for centuries. The militant
image that Newton projected was undeniably magnetic and a source of
inspiration for U.$. oppressed nations.
Yet, the BPP relied too heavily on Newton as an individual leader and
not enough on the party as a whole. Eir ideological insights and
theoretical contributions were unmatched within the party. And to a
certain extent this was a weakness of the party. Newton was the primary
source of oxygen to the party whereas other members of leadership didn’t
meet the demands that the revolutionary movement required of the party.
Bloom and Martin hint at this cult of persynality around Newton, arguing
“In late 1971… Hilliard recalls that Newton was surrounded by loyalists
who applauded Newton’s every action, challenged nothing, and would do
anything to win his approval.”(12) For example, when Newton was
imprisoned on the bogus pig murder charges, the BPP adapted its struggle
and practice toward the “Free Huey” movement. Even Eldridge Cleaver, who
was one of those members of leadership that reneged on eir revolutionary
principles, criticized this move that ultimately confused mass work with
party work. The oppressed masses began to associate the party and the
Panthers with freeing Newton and not liberating themselves. The BPP had
let its practice become dictated by Newton who was for the most part
disconnected from the people and community because of eir imprisonment.
The Panthers should have developed a strong party discipline, one based
on democratic centralism. Democratic centralism means that any decisions
that the party makes is debated and discussed through a democratic
process. Even if party members do not agree with the decisions, they
must support them in public. This ensures that the party maintains unity
in the face of reactionary forces. Those party members who are still in
disagreement with the decision have the opportunity to utilize the
democratic process of the party and make their case. Overall, this
strengthens the theoretical basis of the party and does not allow one
persyn to hijack it or undermine it.
The thrust of this lesson is not to discourage party members from
developing leadership. The revolutionary movement will certainly need
all the leaders, in whatever role or capacity, which the struggle for
national liberation demands. But the point is the importance of party
discipline. Because as we see with the Panther practice many of the
major mistakes stemmed from not maintaining party discipline. Democratic
centralism would have promoted the space and opportunity for members to
challenge and question decisions by Newton. And as members engaged in
this process they would have developed their theoretical practice,
shouldering some of the load that Newton, even while imprisoned, had to
bear.
This is not to say that the Panthers would not have made mistakes. But
with the same party discipline that saw the Bolsheviks lead the
successful Russian Revolution of 1917 or the Chinese Communist Party
execute at a high level throughout the many stages of its liberation
struggle, surely the Panthers could have avoided the divisions that were
largely fomented by FBI interference. In addition, proper application of
democratic centralism should have led to the distinction between party
cadre and mass organizations to take on campaigns like “Free Huey” and
doing the support work to run Panther programs. Such a distinction would
have helped prevent the decline of the Oakland-based party into
reformism as conditions changed.
What our current struggle does not need is a party disciple or some
demagogue who is proclaimed our savior. What will liberate the U.$.
oppressed nation is a Maoist revolutionary organization connected and
related to the masses. Consolidating the mass line is a necessary part
of applying democratic centralism within the Party.
Conclusion
We are at a critical point in the hystory of U.$. national liberation
struggles. No longer can we continue to allow the police to murder us
with impunity or for our communities to exist merely as pathways to
imprisonment. Revolutionary nationalism is needed. And that begins with
relating the thought and struggle of the most advanced revolutionary
organization in U.$. hystory to our current struggle.
This article has highlighted a few mistakes of the BPP. But in no way
does this discard the Panther practice overall. On the contrary, our
path to national liberation has been illumined by the lessons drawn from
the revolutionary legacy of the BPP. It is in this spirit that this
article honors the Black Panther Party, and represents a theoretical
step on that path to liberation.
The terrorist attains his goals by means of instilling fear and
intimidation. The revolutionary, being an egalitarianist,
attains his goals by means of instilling courage. So who then but
the government is the real terrorist? Using the press and the
media, showing off weapons and technologies, instilling fear in
oppressed people, giving them nothing but worries. Wonder why
the people are standing up no more? After decades of being
psychologically bombarded, with nothing but pro-imperialist goon
(pigs) and military blows? Big Brother’s watching you, everybody
knows. Got you watching yourself too, from head to tippy toes
like you was living in One Nine Eight Four.
This year’s election reminds me of the 1980 Ronald Reagan and Jimmy
Carter neo-conservative presidential campaign. We have Donald Trump, the
competitive imperialist bizzness mogul. Now we must ask ourselves, since
we have lesser of the two evils, what is it that we as a nation want as
a leader? But I find myself not liking or feeding into the rhetoric of
both candidates, Trump or Clinton. Hillary Clinton favors exploitation
of Third World international proletariat. Both Trump and Clinton have no
solutions for the oppressed nations here in the United $tates or abroad.
As senator Sanders pointed out, Clinton is in the pockets of big bankers
and Wall Street. And Trump seizes the opportunity to expand his ego and
exploit more oppressed nations, by building casinos, resorts and handing
out slave wages to the proletarians of that land.
But what are the solutions to our problems in this capitalistic culture?
One solution which needs to be addressed is a separate party which would
be for the people and by the people. We must not allow the media to
downgrade socialism. Socialism and a socialist party in the United
Snakes of America is a must. We have to overstand what socialism is and
what it can do for oppressed nations here in America. Bringing equality
to all people, and ending global imperialism. But this brings me to
Bernie Sanders. His rhetoric of free education and universal health care
sounds good, but if you are going to support socialist ideas, then you
must go all the way and build a socialist party, and not allow the two
party system of Amerikkka to stigmatize socialist views and its
persistent hopefulness.
As long as the wings of establishment support imperialism we will never
get close to fruition of socialism. But what really upsets me is that
New Africans in America sell out to capitalistic rhetoric by upholding
or embracing bourgeois cultural propaganda. This is why the title
“lesser of two evils” is used for this essay on the awakening of the
lumpen to class consciousness.
There are so many contradictions within Donald Trump’s “Let’s make
America great again” slogan. First and foremost, we must overstand what
made so-called Amerikkka great. Stealing land and demoralizing the First
Nations. Denying them culture and their own way of life. Enslaving New
Africans, or might I say oppression of all people of color who do not
represent white supremacy. That Trump slogan alone is a subliminal white
supremacist statement. Making those who support the labor aristocracy
continue and support efforts to exploit the white lumpen and the people
or nations of oppressed people of color. Creating more wars, and war on
the revolutionaries who will stand up to imperialism. And I can’t forget
about Hillary Clinton who will continue where her husband left off. She
was a supporter of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act,
signed into law by Bill Clinton. And we have the nerve to say oh she’s
for New Africans. I must conclude that what we have in this election is
lesser of the two evils, Trump vs. Hillary. Capitalism vs. mass
incarceration.
MIM(Prisons) responds: This comrade is on the right track in
condemning the Amerikan election system as a tool to reinforce
imperialist power. There is no choice for the truly oppressed and
exploited of the world. In fact, the vast majority of those exploited by
Amerikan imperialism aren’t even eligible to vote in these elections
because they aren’t Amerikan citizens.
We agree that the lumpen should be paying attention to this election and
using it to raise class consciousness, but we’re not in agreement with
the implication that Bernie Sanders represents socialist ideas. In fact,
he is just the other side of the Donald Trump “Let’s make America great
again” coin. Both want to increase the wealth for the Amerikan labor
aristocracy which can only come at the expense of the exploited Third
World proletariat. Even if Sanders spreads those super profits around a
bit more, that doesn’t help the oppressed majority of the world. Sanders
supports the same aggressive militarist international policies of all
the other imperialist candidates: “We live in a dangerous world full of
serious threats, perhaps none more so than the Islamic State of Iraq and
Syria (ISIS) and al-Qaeda. Senator Sanders is committed to keeping
America safe, and pursuing those who would do Americans harm.”(1)
The problem isn’t just that Sanders doesn’t support an independent
socialist party, the problem is that Sanders is muddying the word
socialist, just like the “national socialists” (aka fascists) in Germany
did in their day. This is not a word meant to ensure greater wealth for
privileged nations at the expense of oppressed nations. And while it’s
possible Sanders could pursue a policy of greater advancement for the
oppressed nations within U.$. borders, this would only serve to expand
the ranks of the labor aristocracy on the backs of oppressed nations
globally. We cannot support that sort of rhetoric.
MIM(Prisons) maintains that it is possible one day Amerika will fully
integrate the oppressed New Afrikan, Chican@, Boriqua and First Nations
like the Irish, Italians and others who initially faced oppression but
later fully integrated into Amerikan society. This could even be done by
shifting around some money from within imperialist Amerika. But judging
from the popularity of the overtly fascist rallying cries from Trump and
eir ilk, it seems more likely that national oppression abroad will
continue to engender national oppression and racism at home.
This election is important for lumpen consciousness within Amerikan
borders because it would be easy to be taken in by the Sanders rhetoric.
Or to be frightened by the Trump rhetoric. And so be moved to rally
around “the lesser of two evils” campaign to get on the streets working
for the “Democratic Party.” But the lumpen class consciousness needs to
be tied to internationalism. We need to diligently point out the
suffering of the international proletariat at the hands of imperialism,
which is the same oppressor keeping the lumpen down. The alliance should
be between these two oppressed groups, against the imperialists. Not
between the lumpen and the so-called left wing of the imperialists
against the international proletariat. Our job as communists is to push
the oppressed and exploited classes to the right side of this equation:
the side of the world’s oppressed.
When the Black Panther Party’s Ten Point Program included: “We will not
fight and kill other people of color in the world who, like Black
people, are being victimized by the White racist government of America”
they were demonstrating this internationalist class consciousness,
specifically in the context of the Vietnam War. This writer is correct
that we will never get close to socialism within the imperialist
establishment. But we disagree that there is actually a lesser of two
evils in any imperialist election, or a choice between imperialism and
mass incarceration. These things go hand in hand, and one side’s
rhetoric benefits some Amerikans more while the other side would benefit
a slightly different group of Amerikans, while the white nation remains
firmly in power, and the wealth continues to come from the exploited in
the Third World.
Red Scare: Memories of the American Inquisition By Griffin
Fariello Avon Books, 1995
Red Scare is set in the time when there were open communist witch
hunts across Amerika. Younger people may not remember or even have heard
of the time when it was a crime to be a revolutionary in the United
$tates. Although the laws have made it “legal” today to be a communist,
it really isn’t as legal as many think. The state’s old methods have
only been fine tuned and made more subtle, but the repression still
exists and may even be more dangerous today than in years past.
Senator Joe McCarthy, elected in 1946, started off as any other Senator
and then took a real fascist turn in 1950 when he began his
anti-communist terror. His political life did not last too long as
McCarthy died in 1957 but his ideals lived on and took on even more
deadly ways in the years after, especially for oppressed nations in
Amerika.
The 1950s was a tougher time for communists in Amerika. There were many
laws that were anti-communist in nature. In the state of Texas for
instance, membership in the Communist Party would get you twenty years
in prison. In the state of Michigan to just write or speak subversive
words would get you life in prison! No wonder Michigan today has some of
the largest white supremacist militias in Amerika. The state of
Tennessee would give you the death penalty for what it called “unlawful
advocacy” that was aimed at communists.
This was a time when buying a house came with having to sign a “loyalty
oath” denouncing communism. A student receiving a diploma had to first
sign an oath, people living in the projects had to sign it for the
landlord at rent time. This was the “war on terror” on steroids. Think
of the round ups and harassment of Muslims in Amerika post-9/11 and
triple that!
By 1956 Hoover’s FBI spread its slimy tentacles so much that in the
CP-USA, whose membership at that time was less than 5,000, one out of
three members was an FBI informant. This may help explain CP-USA’s
passivity on many issues at that time. It was a time when the feds had
three informants in a three-persyn CP unit, so entire units were
comprised of informants, which also helped to ensure who was supplying
reliable information and who wasn’t as the informants were not aware the
others were informants.
The information on surveillance and what one ex-FBI agent called “bag
jobs” was enlightening. It was a look on how the feds really teach their
agents about those of us who want to free the people from oppression. An
ex-FBI agent M. Wesley Swearingen is interviewed about his targeting of
a communist group in COINTELPRO-like methods, defends his self-described
“hundreds” of bag jobs by saying
“none of us worried too much about the illegality, because most of us
were veterans from World War II. Gee, all you had to do is wave a flag
and we’d stand up and salute and do all kinds of things. And after the
indoctrination we got in training school about communism and the
communist party and how they were trying to overthrow us, it was like
war all over again, just that no one was shooting at anybody
yet…”(p. 86)
Like in the 1950s, the FBI enjoys recruiting its agents from police or
military. Like Swearingen noted above, all you have to do is “wave a
flag and we’d stand up and salute and do all kinds of things.” And so
when people want to stop genocide, exploitation and other madness, the
state is meanwhile teaching its agents that it’s war, only no one is
getting shot yet. It’s war because poor people don’t want to live in
land contaminated by toxic waste, because poor people are protesting the
corporate greed, the war on the Third World, etc. For objecting to this
monstrous behavior it’s like “a war all over again.”
The “bag job” involved breaking into a home of a suspect, and if the
suspect was a communist or member of the CP the agents would search for
any pieces of paper with anyone’s names. It could be the paper boy’s
name but agents would gather these names and add them to the “security
index” which was a list kept by the FBI of those “subversives”
(communists) who, in case of “national emergency,” would be rounded up
in concentration kamps. This was awfully similar to how in California
prisons the state deals with the validation process: during all searches
any names found in a supposed gang member’s cell are added to a database
as a gang associate for future targeting and possible round up into SHU
(concentration kamp). The similarities are uncanny, if you simply
substitute “communist party” with “prison gang” you would think a lot of
this was written about California’s validation program.
For example, the ex-FBI agent M. Wesley Swearingen goes on to say
“During the Church Committee hearings one of the Senators asked James
Adams, who was the associate director of the FBI, how long a person
would stay on the security index. I think they were talking about one
individual who had been on there something like twenty or twenty-five
years. And the senator said ‘Did you have any information that he was
still a member of the communist party?’ and Adam’s response was ‘we
didn’t have any information that he was not a member of the communist
party, then we’d keep him in there and we’d keep him on the security
index.’ Sometimes we would get information that someone did drop out of
the communist party, but we wouldn’t believe it anyway. Bill Sennett
stayed on the security index almost ten years after he quit the party
because no one would believe it.”(p. 95)
The chapter titled “Five minutes to midnight” discussed the underground.
In the late ’50s CP-USA began discussing the inevitability of war
between the Soviet Union and the United States. It was decided that the
United States was on the verge of repression and so to survive the
coming fascism the party would need an underground organization.
The underground apparatus was organized in three different levels. The
first level was called “deep freeze” which were top leadership who
jumped bail for conviction on the Smith Act which basically criminalized
the act of being a communist, along with those who it was assumed would
be in the next sweep of arrests. The second level was called the “deep
deep freeze.” These were trusted members who would be a source of
leadership should all the other leaders be arrested. Many of these
people were sent abroad to Mexico, Canada or Europe, kind of like
sleeper cells, to lead normal lives and not engage in any political
activity. The third level was called “operative but unavailable” who
traveled state to state in disguise working as liaison between the
aboveground party and the deep freeze.
According to the author, millions of dollars were spent on the
underground apparatus with lodgings, transportation, and the courier
system that kept the hundreds of men and wimmin underground. This took
its toll with almost everyone abandoning the party within five years.
The writer states “seasoned communists realized the impossibility of
carrying a political movement in this fashion.” A couple of decades
later, activists would probably beg to differ with this because of the
targeting, murder, and imprisonment that followed being above ground.
The Smith Act created some real anti-communist ways of thinking. The
city of Birmingham, Alabama for instance passed a law in the 1950s
mandating that all communists had forty-eight hours to leave town or
face imprisonment. This was looked at as normal treatment for political
ideas by many. This continues to sound like the witch hunts progressive
prisoners face today in Amerika where you are locked in control units,
not for acts, but ideas, beliefs or assumed beliefs and yet it’s not for
2 or 3 years like when the Smith Act was enforced but decades and
sometimes for life!
Red Scare falls short in not analyzing the politics of this
era, not discussing the political line of revolutionary groups of the
1950s. The Jim Crowism was not even really talked about much. The author
does discuss events like the Rosenberg trial/execution, children of the
persecuted and what ey calls “redactors” who were the teachers who were
persecuted under McCarthyism. But ey does not get into the oppressed
nations of that time. The author gives one example of the CP-USA going
to New Mexico to work in the Chicano barrios, briefly mentions the Black
Panthers, and does not even mention the First Nations.
One will not learn anything of the different ideologies of that time yet
this book is worth reading if you seek to understand the birth of
COINTELPRO which really decimated the oppressed nations’ struggles in
the ’60s and ’70s. Although this book was written in the 1990s it reads
as if it was written in the 1950s with its oppressor-nation outlook on
struggles during the McCarthy period, a little too vanilla and boring,
but worth plowing through the 500+ pages only for its content on early
COINTELPRO.
Red Scare speaks volumes about the success of the Soviet Union in
building socialism, a more popular alternative to capitalism. While it
is easy to laugh at the extreme paranoia expressed by the state in this
period, there was a real fear starting in the 1930s when the Soviet
Union was developing in leaps while the capitalist world crumbled under
the great depression. Coming out of World War II, during which the
Soviet Union demonstrated its technological and ideological strength,
the Red Scare of the 1950s reflected this.
I always express how important it is to salute the comrades to the young
prisoners and the unconscious prisoners. For them to always assist in
some way in the struggle. Here in [the facility where I am] it’s a whole
different world. It’s like the twilight zone, you have to see it to
believe it. But it’s our duty to still push to get the fire burning and
to keep the fire burning.
These oppressors, the pigs, have domesticated and brainwashed so many of
these prisoners, to where they think that comradism is nutty. So I give
my all to try to enlighten the ones whose ears I can catch. Explain to
them that if it wasn’t for this comradism, some of these small
opportunities that we do have as rights (to see your lawyers, phone
calls, rec time, keeping your legal work, law library), some of these
battles have been won on the back of some hell of men. Even cost some of
them their lives, and they was willing to die for something. We must be
grateful and love these warriors.
I try to make an example about how much these oppressors fear and hate
these warriors. I try to tell them to look at yourself and some of the
other brothers that we say put work in. These prisoners can stab another
prisoner numerous times and get one year or six months hole time. But
the warriors don’t have to touch a soul and be in the hole, for ten,
twenty, thirty years, and never put a knife or nothing else in another
prisoner. I tell them that they’re more afraid of the knowledge they
possess, they know who the true enemy is. So these warriors is some of
the most feared prisoners and go through a lot of torture, for the cause
that all prisoners benefit from. So I salute the comrades - THANKS AND
KEEP THE FIRE BURNING.
This is a question which all communists must ask themselves at one point
or another of their revolutionary careers. Furthermore, it is a question
which has essentially dominated the International Communist Movement
(ICM) ever since that movement became a real contender on the world
stage. Suffice to say that there has never in essence been a more
important question to ask and correctly answer within the ICM itself
other than patriotism or internationalism? That said, the concepts of
patriotism and internationalism are not mutually exclusive phenomena
forever separated by the same great impassable divide of ideological
difference, rather, patriotism and internationalism as properly
understood by communists are dialectically interconnected concepts that
we must struggle to unite.
Sometimes general, sometimes particular, but always of universal
importance, the concepts of patriotism and internationalism represent
different aspects of the subjective forces whose task it is to carry out
revolution both at home and abroad. Focus too much on one and you run
the danger of making an ultra-left mistake. Focus too much on the other
and you will not only be committing a tactical mistake, but will be
guilty of committing a right opportunist error. What comrades must
understand however is that pushing the revolutionary vehicle towards a
bright communist future isn’t necessarily about making the decision of
patriotism or internationalism. It’s about both. This is the topic which
the following essay will attempt to explain. Thus in wars of national
liberation patriotism is applied internationalism – but are there other
ways for us to apply internationalism within nation-specific projects?
Contrary to how this quote has been narrowed down by some comrades,
applied internationalism isn’t only about each nation fighting their own
battles and hoping that anti-imperialists from other nations will be
astute enough to recognize the tactical opportunities of our fight and
hence get in where they fit in. Internationalism is about extending our
hands and providing assistance to our comrades whenever we can and
offering lesser but equally important means of support when other
avenues of help have been closed off to us.
Point in fact, MIM(Prisons) can’t physically and persynally reach out to
every prisoner on a one-on-one level. But it has a bi-monthly newsletter
that goes out to the prison masses as well as a Free Books to Prisoner
Program, a website created in part to help facilitate the needs of
prisoners across the United $tates and document abuse. It runs study
groups and most recently help put out Chican@ Power and the Struggle
for Aztlán, a book that will help to build public opinion for
revolution in North America by agitating in favor of the Chican@ masses.
Not to mention the other nation-specific and internationalist projects
which it has been responsible for spawning.
Another excellent but largely forgotten and ignored example of applied
internationalism being practiced outside of a nation’s own borders is
how the Cuban masses under the leadership of Fidel Castro volunteered to
cross the Atlantic to fight alongside the Angolan people in their
struggle of national liberation against Portuguese and Amerikan
imperialism. This act took place for a variety of reasons, but perhaps
none more important than the sheer anger, disgust and solidarity which
Cubans felt at the sight of imperialist bombs falling on Angolan heads.
It could then be said that this sacrifice on behalf of the Cuban people
marked a development as well as a leap in the revolutionary
consciousness of the Cuban nation, both because they were willing to
give up their lives in the service of another oppressed nation and
because with their sacrifice they helped land such a strong and decisive
blow against colonialism, while simultaneously helping to detach Angola
from the imperialist framework. It could therefore be said that this
action on behalf of the Cuban masses was equally, if not more
significant than the Cuban revolution itself. This is just another
reason why Cuba holds such a special place in the revolutionary hearts
of oppressed people everywhere.
This now brings us to a recent debate initiated within the California
Council concerning USW’s potential contribution to a certain nationalist
project, and a certain comrade’s apprehensions/objections about the role
of USW vis-a-vis the national liberation struggles of the oppressed
internal nations, as well as the exertion of influence on USW by
revolutionary nationalists operating within that organization. In eir
argument the comrade in question took the position that no one nation
should be forced to take part in another nation’s struggles, citing that
this would be tantamount to one nation co-opting others to do its job
for them. That said, no nation should be allowed to control another
nation’s destiny or make decisions for other nations that are integral
to the liberation of the latter as this would in effect mark the
beginnings of a neo-colonial relation on a certain level. Furthermore,
the comrade also made the statement that “USW is not one nation united,
it’s multi-national.” Now this may be true, but the correct definition
for USW is the following:
“USW is explicitly anti-imperialist in leading campaigns on behalf of
prisoners in alliance with national liberation struggles in the United
$tates and around the world. USW won’t champion struggles which are not
in the interests of the international proletariat. USW will also not
choose one nation’s struggles over other oppressed nations struggles.”
And from the pamphlet The Fundamental Political Line of the Maoist
Internationalist Ministry of Prisons:
“Rebuilding the anti-imperialist prison movement means uniting all who
can be united around the common interests of the U.$. prison population
in solidarity with the oppressed people of the Third World…”
So while we should definitely be in agreement that no nation should be
forced to participate in another nation’s struggles and that no one
nation should be allowed to come up at the expense of another, this does
not in any way mean that USW, or the California Council in particular,
should be disallowed from initiating proposals and passing resolutions
that will support and lend assistance to nations or nation-specific
organizations represented within or outside of USW. The nation in
question can either accept the assistance or not. This method of action
and participation will ensure that USW retains its United Front mass
organization character by preserving the unity and independence of all
USW comrades and affiliated organizations. Indeed, USW, like all other
organizations, has a dual character. Unlike most other organizations
however USW’s duality is complementary and it is not an antagonistic
contradiction. While it is true that USW is a mass organization created
to represent and fight for the common interests of all prisoners as a
distinct social group, it is also a launch pad for the national
liberation struggles of the oppressed internal nations in which comrades
can cut their teeth thru revolutionary organizing, and from where they
can then go on to initiate and lead national liberation struggles on
behalf of their own respective nations.
This is what USW, as an anti-imperialist prisoner organization, should
be about: the internationalism of prisoners breeding revolutionary
nationalism, and revolutionary nationalist projects breeding
internationalism amongst the prison masses. This requires more than each
nation blindly going its own separate way. It requires unity of action
and unity of discipline. As such, it would seem then that what we have
here with the comrade in question may be a problem of perspective. What
some might see as internationalism others might perceive as a
contradiction. What some regard as mutual assistance others will call
co-optation. For those of us having this problem of “perception”
however, we would be wise to be cautious not to let our own love for our
nations blind us to the plight of others, as sometimes what this fear of
“co-optation” really translates to is our own fear or refusal to
participate in another nation’s struggles. Thus, we should be aware of
how our own nation’s struggles, as well as our failure to act on behalf
of other nations, can affect the ICM, lest we degenerate to the level of
narrow nationalism.
Since this question of whether or not USW should participate in a
variety of nation-specific struggles seems to be one rooted in
perception, let us take a closer look at the supposed pimping of nations
that would take place if USW were to decide to work in the interests of
a distinct national project. As has been the current practice thus far,
nowhere at all has this resulted in one nation’s struggle being taken up
to the detriment of another. But let’s just suppose that this is the
case, then maybe ULK should just stop featuring articles that
promote the struggle of one nation or another so that we may ensure that
no comrades from any nation feel as if they’re being pushed into the
background, or that their nation-specific article is forced to share
space on the pages of an internationalist forum that also represents one
nation or another, lest these comrades begin to feel “co-opted.”
Just because Mao Zedong said that in wars of national liberation the
nationalism of the oppressed nations is applied internationalism, it
does not justify our lack of adherence to other internationalist
principles. This is a guiding line of real communism and should likewise
be seen as a line of demarcation for all revolutionary nationalists
claiming the mantles of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao. Applied
internationalism is about more than just fighting your own nation’s
struggles and we should never forget that. To give an additional
hystorical example, when Amerikan imperialism attacked Vietnam the
People’s Republic of China aided the Vietnamese by providing all types
of supplies including food, money and intelligence. Most activists of
the time believed this was not enough and that the Chinese should’ve
provided troops as well. We wonder what the previously mentioned comrade
would think about this? Perhaps ey would say it was too much and that
the Chinese were already guilty of co-opting Vietnam’s national
liberation struggle and how dare anyone suggest that the Chinese become
more involved? Of course, in a possible revolutionary future we can even
envision a myriad of situations in which the internal semi-colonies will
be forced to coordinate and work shoulder-to-shoulder to oust Amerikan
imperialism from their territories. Or would this too be a case of one
semi-colony co-opting the struggle of another?
The
Palestinian
campaign initiated by USW last year is yet another internationalist
project that is now shadowed by question marks, at least according to
that one comrade’s perspective. Perhaps this was simply incorrect
practice and “a waste of USW’s time”? As previously stated, while we
agree that no nation should be forced to contribute to another nation’s
struggles, we also believe that no comrade should feel as if they’re
being “forced” to participate in another nation’s struggles. As such,
maybe these type of people aren’t so much for internationalism as they
sometimes claim to be? Because Mao accomplished and wrote so much on the
national liberation struggle of China many have erroneously come to
believe that ey was a nationalist first and a Marxist-Leninist second;
but this view is wrong. Mao loved eir nation but ey was a
Marxist-Leninist first and foremost who recognized the liberation of
China as only a small component in the global struggle for communism.
Choosing and deciding what internationalist struggles one can
participate in besides those that are explicitly national liberationist
exclusive to one’s own is both a tactical and strategical question that
is dictated by the struggles and conditions of the time. Lacking a clear
and coherent reason why not to participate is indicative of a national
chauvinist political line in command. The USW Palestine campaign was a
fairly easy campaign to initiate due to the current stage of the
struggle and most USW comrades’ material conditions. Other struggles
will take more time and consideration to implement, while some might be
outright out of the question. Excluding the labor aristocracy, there is
a reason why revolutionaries from Marx to Mao championed the slogan:
“workers of all countries unite!”
We struggle for the liberation of all oppressed people or we don’t
struggle at all.
“Without a revolutionary theory there can be no revolutionary movement.
This cannot be insisted upon too strongly at a time when the fashionable
preaching of opportunism combined with absorption in the narrowest forms
of practical activity.” - V. I. Lenin
Often times the first half of this quote is misrepresented by people not
really knowing the context. Well-meaning comrades will repeat this
political axiom when calling for others to pick up their theoretical
game (grasp of revolutionary science), for reasons having to do with the
obvious need for revolutionary theory to influence and propagate our
revolutionary practice. Yet it was in the process of struggle and heated
political debate that Lenin first made this now famous statement. These
struggles and other political debates were recalled by Lenin in eir book
What is to be Done?; a book about communist organization and
discipline. More to my point, in this book, Lenin addressed the
importance that revolutionary theory should play in informing the
revolutionary movement, in part for the purpose of combating various
erroneous tendencies.
The main tendency which Lenin devoted the better part of this book to
was the problem of opportunism. Opportunism can be defined as the
conscious or unconscious watering down of political line in order to
garner more sympathy for your cause or movement. It can also be said
that opportunism can be described as the glossing over of contradictions
within the revolutionary movement so as to not offend or turn away your
social base. A perfect example of opportunism would be to tell Amerikans
that they are the revolutionary vehicle which we call the proletariat
instead of telling them the truth: that they are by and large the
objective enemies of the international proletariat – parasites which we
call the labor aristocracy.
One example of how opportunism can work its way into the revolutionary
prison movement is thru a philosophical belief called pragmatism. To be
a pragmatist means to worship the tactics of whatever works at the
present time. While there may be occasions in which we must do what is
most effective at that particular instance/moment, we must do so in a
way that doesn’t have us sacrificing our political principles or
political line, all for the sake of practical results. Pragmatism as a
strategic orientation is a danger to revolutionary movements because it
can cause us to shift focus from our strategic goals in favor of the
immediacy of tactical results. While tactical wins are a good thing for
the oppressed, we will be in error if we confuse a tactical gain for
strategic victory. A real world example of the negative effects of
pragmatism is how many prisoners who participated in the California
hunger strikes first initiated in 2011 abandoned the struggle for humyn
rights in favor of material concessions and a more comfortable
oppression.
Other more nuanced examples of how opportunism has come to dominate
political organizing behind prison walls come in the form of “friendship
groups” and “elites.” Both are hazards to the prison movement because of
the seemingly casual nature of the two and the Liberalism that underlies
them.
Friendship groups are the more obvious of the two. Friendship groups can
be defined as: “A group of friends who also happen to participate in the
same political activities. Most of these groups’ members participate
within the group because they like the people in them and not because
they have the correct political line.”
Elites can be defined as: “A small group of people who have power over a
larger group of which they are a part of, usually without a direct
responsibility to that larger group and often without their knowledge or
consent.”
Friendship groups function on an external level and so many prisoners
will surely recognize one when they see them, as most LOs have these
types of groups functioning in one capacity or another. Elites on the
other hand, while being dialectically related to the friendship group
are the opposite and function on an internal level. One thing which both
these groups share in common is their popularization and use of false
logic as a method of accomplishing their objectives. This false logic
can be best understood as sophism; a method of argument that fake
philosophers use to fool the masses by exploiting to their own advantage
any situation they encounter or create. One such method of the
professional sophist is the ad hominem attack. Ad hominen attacks are
marked by appeals to feelings or prejudices rather than to intellect.
For example, if one persyn doesn’t like another persyn’s politics, but
can’t correctly argue against eir political line, the aggressor might
use an ad hominem attack instead. The ad hominem attack might be
accusing the persyn of violating an established taboo, such as stealing
from another persyn.
Opportunism will find its way into revolutionary movements and
organizations if both the masses and the leadership do not have a strong
grasp or even an elementary understanding of revolutionary theory. This
can allow for various dishonest and incorrect elements to find their way
into our structures, which as a result can cause our movements to falter
and perish. This is why as revolutionaries we put such a high premium on
the study of revolutionary science not only amongst the prison
leadership but the prison masses. Furthermore, in making this point we
cannot over-emphasize the dialectical relation between study and
practice, as a correct grasp of one will inevitably lead to a correct
grasp of the other.
To re-iterate, preventative measures are essential in order to
safe-guard our movements from taking up opportunism and watering down
their revolutionary agendas. We must strongly advocate and fight for the
study and production of both revolutionary theory and practice not only
to effectively meet the demands and goals of revolutionary organizing,
but to navigate our movements thru the sea and fog of bourgeois
Liberalism. Our practice will grope in the dark unless its path is
illuminated by the most advanced revolutionary theory.
Last, but certainly not least, i would like to speak to other challenges
of revolutionary organizing behind prison walls. When working with the
lumpen and attempting to organize for our collective liberation it is
only natural that we will run into a variety of problems that may end
with us in frustration. However, we should not blithely dismiss the
prison masses as incapable of listening to our message because they are
supposedly too “ignorant”, “backward” or “apolitical” to understand what
the so-called “revolutionary” might regard as “complex,” as this has
more to do with the revolutionary’s own ignorance, inability and
incapability to either understand the masses or effectively communicate
to them the correct political line. More likely than not, when any
movement, strike or action fails to materialize or develop it is not due
to the low level of consciousness of the masses, but to the
revolutionaries’ own lack of profundity and insight into the movement of
the masses which they often claim some sort of near spiritual connection
to.
We must continue to find better ways to correct our approach and
understanding of the masses, correct our shortcomings, and stop blaming
the masses. Likewise, neither should we fear the masses or their
criticism, as the acceptance of criticism and self-criticism is integral
to establishing the correct revolutionary line. Do not fear the masses
because they are the way forward, and do not fear their criticism
because often times they prove to be correct, if even just a bit, for
whosoever fears the criticism of the masses only proves that what they
really fear is revolution. Above all, always remember that
revolutionaries are not above the masses in any way, shape or form. We
are but the advanced detachment of the prison movement, nothing more,
nothing less. Whoever does not believe this is not a Maoist.
In writing this missive a relevant story comes to mind. When the masses
in socialist China were struggling for control of their country against
the capitalist roaders during the period of the Great Proletarian
Cultural Revolution, many so-called “revolutionaries” felt that the
masses were out of control, and that they weren’t yet ready to share
state power with the communist party. Many of these revolutionaries
advocated an end to this “anarchy,” accusing the masses of being too
backward to run the country. To this Mao Zedong and Lin Biao responded:
“The assumption of power by ideological means is absolutely necessary if
consolidation of the working class’s power and hegemony is the goal… To
accomplish the decisive political leap, the leading role must revert to
the masses; this has nothing to do as it is generally believed in the
West to do with any form of spontaneity. The role of the party in
destroying ‘spontaneous’ illusions lies in the quality of leadership
which consists in transforming dispersed rebel movements into a
revolutionary current capable of overcoming contradictions. Lin Biao
says that the mass revolutionary movement is naturally correct; for
among the masses, right and left-wing deviationist groups may exist, but
the main current of the mass movement always corresponds to the
development of that society involved and is always correct. Revolution
is the resolution of contradictions.”(1)
From this end of the bend the only subject relevant to prisoners in
regards to the early Black Panther Party (BPP) is the party as a Maoist
organization and how prisoners should apply the teachings of the early
Panthers to free themselves - resisting the foolishness of the late
personality cliques capitalizing off of the party’s reputation. What is
most important is getting to the truth between the legacy of the BPP and
what it was that the founders were really getting at. What role, if any,
do later groups play in keeping the vision alive? And how is it that
prisoners should use these lessons in these later years of
anti-imperialist prison organizing efforts?
Many New Afrikan lumpen organizations inside prison take their plays
directly from the playbook of early BPP members while never truly
crediting the party for its works. This in turn creates further
confusions between the Lumpen Organization’s (LO’s) followers and former
members of the authentic movement. Others within U.$. prisons are
charismatic individuals working hand over hand with the bourgeois
nationalist organizations, spreading misinformation about the BPP.
Recently PBS ran a piece on a program called Independent Lens
that
documented
the history of the Black Panther Party. As expected it was as
watered down as the bourgeois press and media felt it could get away
with.(1) Several of the prisoners housed on this facility burst at their
seems with inspiration of the works of the Black Panther Party. It was
information that they felt they should have known, being they are
Afrikans.
Other BPP images being portrayed on this 50th anniversary year include
one specific article written by a charismatic imprisoned individual that
went on and on about Huey P. Newton, a co-founder of the Black Panther
Party, and not on how prisoners should learn from the early lessons of
Newton, applying their lessons of political education in the struggles
of today.(2) And probably the most noticed recent portrayal of the
Panthers came in the form of sexual media, with
Beyonce
and eir Super Bowl 50 performance. Capitalizing off of the history
of the Black power era, Beyonce adorned eirself and eir backup dancers
with black leathers, black boots and black berets. Prisoners should
question the significance of Black Panther costume jewelry and make-up
versus scientific relevance inside U.$. prisons.(3)
Very few prisoners appreciate the political significance of the
difference between the early BPP and the late BPP. This is the reason so
many prisoners crowd towards movements that appear authentic and
genuinely interested in liberation struggles. The masses are presented
with ideas of Black, Brown, red, yellow and white power by superstar
groups like #BlackLivesMatter, but prisoners have very few tools of
independence to combat the misinformation spewed by these bourgeois
nationalist organizations and their personalities. Movements built on
single issue organizing, swabbing the support of the populations using
identity politics, do a disservice to the oppressed, depriving them of
the truth.
The Black Panther Party held the correct line in its early stages, and
because of this it was rewarded with the support of the internal
semi-colonies of the United $tates, the majority being lumpen youth. In
its early years the BPP was truly independent, concentrating on its
services to Blacks, at a time when the term Black was just as
independent as the party. So the organization was able to operate in a
loose way within the First World. The early party took its science from
a variety of teachings, from the Pan-Afrikan movement to the Chinese
communist movement, Lenin’s Russia, Stalin’s theory of nation, and Mao’s
People’s War. Mao influenced much of the Black Panther Party’s position
as a structured organization. The early members had a very real practice
of materialist solutions provided to those in the same environment
suffering under conditions of class indifferences, national isolation
and gender extinction. They did not believe in struggling against a
system while at the same time becoming liberated by the very same system
they struggled against.
The prison personality contest conflicts become prominent, with prison
identity politics valued above the peace that independence-building
projects bring to a self-reliant and self-determined people’s
anti-imperialist prison movement. Too many prisoners and prison LOs see
the end of their individual suffering at the expense of exploiting
entire prison populations. MIM(Prisons) and United Struggle from Within
(USW) see it differently as we define in the United Front for Peace in
Prisons (UFPP) principle of independence. Independence is
building our own institutions and programs independent of the united
states government and all its branches, right down to the local police,
because this system does not serve us. By developing independent power
through these institutions we do not need to compromise our goals.
The Black Panther Party prioritized the momentum of the people in its
early years because of the line and position it had on Maoism. The BPP
transitioned for some time to a level above many of the revisionist and
liberal bourgeois nationalist organizations of the late sixties and was
able to attract some of the most progressive members of the lower class,
that many now refer to as the First World lumpen. The Panthers at this
time studied history from the perspective of dialectical materialism, in
contrast to the methods of metaphysics and idealism, and had a clear
program that was being adopted by various sectors of the masses across
the United $tates. They applied practices that included designing
programs that required members to perform services for the community at
large, from education to self defense. The services of the Black Panther
Party reflected its line in such a way that it was mandatory that
members knew the rules of the BPP, the 8 points of attention and the 3
main rules of discipline, off the top of their head. The early Panthers
were really on point.
It is in the later stages of the party’s existence that things began to
take a turn as a result of the organization shifting from its earlier
positions on independence, self-determination and liberation in the
interest of the oppressed. This shift occurred in 1970-71, and was
marked by the development of the theory of “intercommunalism” by Huey P.
Newton. With the added pressures of government-launched campaigns to
destroy the Black Panther Party, the party became split on every level
one possibly could imagine.
Walking in the Panther Legacy Today
Since the demise of the BPP, though the movement never actually died, a
wide gap has grown between the generation of Huey, George, Bunchy, Fred,
Kathleen and Geronimo and the generation of Freddie Gray, Mike Brown and
Sandra Bland. Since the Panthers, many organizations became infected
with a type of Pantherism/inter-communalism fervor. These organizations
hold that they themselves keep the work of the Black Panther Party
alive, all the while erasing the Maoist politics of the BPP. See our
article on the
Black
Riders Liberation Party for a discussion of another group confusing
this legacy today.(4)
United Struggle from Within (USW) is a mass organization led by the
Maoist Internationalist Ministry of Prisons for prisoners and former
prisoners in the United $tates. USW is made up of various political
prison activists struggling against their oppressive conditions. We are
part of an ongoing struggle against the imperialist state to liberate
ALL peoples, not only the select few who have made themselves
popular at the expense of the people. While USW seeks immediate goals to
improve prison conditions, it does not lose sight of the ultimate goal
of national liberation and ending imperialism.
“There are two kinds of nationalism, revolutionary nationalism and
reactionary nationalism. Revolutionary nationalism is first dependent
upon a peoples revolution with the end goal being the people in power.
Therefore to be revolutionary nationalist you would by necessity have to
be a socialist. If you are a reactionary nationalist you are not a
socialist and your end goal is the oppression of the people.”(5)
Like their parent organization, many comrades of USW see the Black
Panther Party developed by Huey P. Newton as the Maoist vanguard of the
United States in the late 1960s. The Black Panther Party grew so rapidly
at that time that many of the new recruits and larger memberships had
very little opportunity to establish a deep understanding of the
political objectives of the party. A lack of political education allows
political movements to be co-opted, infiltrated, and run into the ground
by enemy line.(6)
USW learns from the Black Panther Party, its good, bad and ugly.
Parallel to the method practiced by our parent organization
MIM(Prisons), USW comrades apply righteous actions by righteous studies
of logic and these are some lessons we take:
No investigation, no right to speak. USW will not misrepresent or
misinform the masses.
Correctness of ideas assessed independent of who says them. USW does not
engage in the persynality contest so popular in the United $tates and
its prisons.
We do not give out information that the pigs could use to assess or
destroy our movement. Fishing is a favored method amongst the agent
provocateurs and their drones inside the belly of the beast. USW
comrades have a clear definition of what a snitch, a rat and a pig is.
We don’t use the terms loosely and never false jacket individuals, as
our pledge to the United Front for Peace in Prison principle of
unity requires.
Anonymity isn’t just about security, it’s also about teaching prisoners
to think scientifically rather than follow the person with specific skin
tone or hair style. USW must struggle against identity politics and the
way it shall go about confronting it as its membership crosses paths
with the prison lumpen organization leaders, with their cult-like
followings, is in the most peaceful way possible, Under Lock &
Key. This issue of ULK is a further advancement into serious
dialogues between politically conscious prisoners and the masses.
Prisoners as a whole must take from this history, from a Maoist point of
view and decide what side they are on. The side of half truths,or the
always evolving side of deep study and materialist dialectics.
As Sukant Chandan of Sons of Malcom put it, identity politics is doing
the imperialist divide and rule for the enemy, by “focusing purely on
individualistic frameworks and issues of oppression which overshadow or
totally obliterate understanding, learning and support for Resistance of
peoples against imperialism.”(7) So just as the Panthers were not about
costume jewelry and black berets, they were not about petty beefing and
slights towards small groups of people.
So why are there so many groups inside prisons who claim to identify
with the Black Panther Party but do not uphold Maoism? Their class
loyalty is to the bourgeoisie and they refuse to accept the most
scientifically designed methods of discovering concrete practices that
elevate the peoples. Study Maoism, study proletarian internationalism,
study the actual words of the Black Panther Party from the late 1960s.
Peace from the Gods! We salute the world with universal greetings of
peace. We recognize the need for unity-criticism-unity. We only want to
build upon the “actual facts”
Wiawimawo
built upon concerning Islam and New Afrikans. We have found that
concerning so-called revolutionaries scientific approach towards New
Afrikans and Islam one must first define, then science out the
rest for the sake of peace and the absence of confusion. A New Afrikan
is a young, poorly educated, superstitious, disillusioned Black person
fed up with the slow legal process, who takes up a militant stance
against the lack of equality of opportunity and treatment in the United
States according to E. David Cronon, a Marcus Garvey biographer who
wrote Black Moses. Islam is and always will be peace. There is no
“I” in Arabic, so Islam is As-Slaam, root word slm, which is
peace. A deaf dumb and blind would use the so-called translation of
submission to the will of Allah as the defining of Islam. These are the
Facts! Peace is one of the reasons we salute Under Lock &
Key.
Wiawimawo has taken a few fragments of information and stretched them to
fit a particular line. In the article when he [sic] uses citation 10
from Knight’s book, he leaves out the part that states “in turn
some[emphasis ours - Legion] Five Percenters replace
‘understand’ with York’s ‘overstand’ (itself grafted from Rastafari) in
regular conversation…” We feel as if to make a point the comrade can’t
defend a poorly constructed argument, so a blanket statement is made.
That’s like us saying the Maoist let the Black Panther Party get
massacred and laid it down during the COINTELPRO stings.
In citation 11 about the Gods, Black Muslims and Rastafarians in cahoots
to kill suspected dope dealers was a cover-up the NYPD manifested to
cover up the fact they had ten unsolved murders on the books along with
the assassinations of various so-called Black messiahs. On pages 248-252
of In the Name of Allah Vol. 1 you’ll find the full history of
the situation. The NYCPD, NYPD and FBI tried to cause yet another “civil
war” between the Gods and Black Muslims. The NOI was cleared and NYC
Mayor Lindsay put Barry Gottehrer to the task of clearing up the
confusion.
Five Percenters are doing what no other LO or nation has the ability to
do with regard to citation 13, and have been since before 1970. [“In the
later 1970s the Five Percenters recruited whole street gangs into their
fold whose members accounted for a significant portion of the arrests in
Brooklyn during those years.(13)” - Wiawimawo] We are nation builders.
It’s what we do.
This line about civic duty and spirituality is another stretch. The Five
Percenters main brain function is pulling people out of the mud with
proper knowledge of self. Spirit as defined in Funk and Wagnalls
dictionary is the part of the human being characterized by intelligence,
personality, self-consciousness, and will; the mind. We live on actual
facts every day in every way. No spook in the sky is ever going to feed
us or you. It’s in the lessons.
We must point out that Allah (the Father) was never close friends with
Malcolm X. The Father stayed away from the beef between X and Elijah.
The people come first. The strength of a nation before money is the
youth. Malcolm X let the lime light get himself killed. We respect the
intent, but the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
People also seem to forget Malcolm X was a UNIA Mason before Elijah,
before his brother told him about Islam. So his ability to do for self
was in his political make up anyways.
The difference between allegory and myth are exponential. A myth is used
to explain a natural phenomenon, while allegory is used to represent
characters and events as ideals and princples. To discount the Yacub
theory is to discredit any and all efforts made by Maoists, whom use
dialectical materialism to present solutions to problems faced by the
masses. We are tasked with learning the science of everything in life.
So we tend to look listen and observe through an independent lense. If
one is a scientist then you are a religionist. If you are not then you
really aren’t living the life of a scientist (i.e. devoted).
Wiawimawo of MIM(Prisons) responds: Thanks to Legion for eir
feedback and corrections. Legion pointed me in the right direction for
research on this topic, but is much more knowledgeable on the history
than i. There is an interesting problem that we face as we attempt to
lay out the history of most LOs when there is little documentation, and
primary sources are mostly stories and the (subjective) memories of
certain individuals. Much of the research in Knight’s book is admittedly
unverified and presented in a very loose form.
My citation 10, on Rastafari’s influence on the NGE was flimsy on it’s
own. But i do believe the influence is greater than the use of one word,
for example in terms of diet and dress (of some Five Percenters, not
all). And the bigger point i was making still stands, that the NGE is a
uniquely New Afrikan organization that reflects the history of the
nation via movements including Rastafari, UNIA, MSTA, NOI, hip hop and
lumpen street organizations.
We agree with Legion that the allegory of the white man as the devil is
useful. However, it seems clear that it was taught as historical
scripture by many. As a white researcher of the history of these
organizations, perhaps Michael Knight gave it special attention. But it
is at least one of the major issues that caused Malcolm X and Wallace
Muhammad to split with Elijah Muhammad. So its unscientific aspect has
made it divisive among New Afrikans at times, and the story of Yacub has
never been the mythology of the majority of the nation.
As discussed in the original article, idealist philosophies usually
differentiate between the material world and the spiritual one. Such
philosophies are “dualist.” Communists are monists, as we do not believe
there is a mind or spirit that is separate from our material bodies. By
working to transform society we address both the material and the
so-called spiritual needs of the people. Above Legion seems to see the
NGE similarly. Even the NOI has in its founding ideology a “do-for-self
in this world” line, yet the NOI philosophy is clearly religious. As i
argue in the original article, the NGE represents a move towards
materialism (and therefore monism), but certainly in its founding ideas
there are many parallels to the NOI. Finally, we do not agree that a
scientist is a practitioner of religion; as we define in my original
article, religion “is idealism with organized rituals.” Legion’s
insistence on merging science and religion seem to demonstrate that
there is still some level of disagreement between us there.