[Pnews] Power Concedes Nothing: A Discussion on CDCr's Insidious Maintenance of SHU Torture Units
Prisoner News
ppnews at freedomarchives.org
Wed Mar 26 17:40:17 EDT 2014
*Power Concedes Nothing:*
*/A Discussion on CDCr's Insidious Regulatory Semantics and Judicial
Collusion in Maintenance of SHU Torture Units/*
From the N.C.T.T.-COR-SHU
"Revolutionary activity in every area of human existence will come
about by itself when the contradictions in every new process are
comprehended; it will consist of an identification with those forces
that are moving in the direction of genuine progress. To be
radical.. .means "getting to the root of things." If one gets to the
/root/ of things, if one grasps their contradictory operations,
then the overcoming of political reaction is assured... hence, a
critique can only be significant and have a practical value if it
can show the contradictions of social reality were overlooked."
- Wilhelm Reich, /Ideology as a Material Force/
Greetings Brothers and Sisters. The 3rd Law of Dialectical Change, "The
Negation of Negation," dictates once social conditions undergo a
qualitative transformation there is also a corresponding evolution in
the contradiction between opposing social forces. Over the course of the
past 3 years progressive social forces in America (i.e. Decolonize &
Occupy Movements, PHSS and SHU Abolition Activists, Strike Debt, BRLP,
and other Revolutionary Scientific Socialist Formations, etc.) have
waged a struggle to wrest cultural hegemony from the U.S. ruling class
on multiple fronts and at multiple levels of society-including at its
most desperate and wretched level: PRISONS. As a result, there has been
a qualitative transformation in the consciousness of significant
segments of society.
With this in mind, the most dynamic aspect of the peoples struggle
against the maintenance and expansion of the Prison Industrial Complex
is our current movement to abolish SHU torture units in America (and
around the world), initiated by the Pelican Bay D-Short Corridor
Collective. With the resolution of the historic "Agreement to End
Hostilities
<http://www.californiaprisonwatch.org/p/agreement-to-end-hostilities-august-12.html>,"
the cooperative efforts of People from diverse cultural groups,
socio-economic backgrounds, and schools of thought and the sacrifices of
thousands here in California (and around the globe) in three Historic
Hunger Strikes (the third being the single largest in human history) the
People have seized the moral high ground on this issue, drastically
narrowing CDCr's base of support and room to maneuver.. .but not
eliminate it.
Instead of a definitive transformation in the culture of prison torture
resulting in an abolition of indefinite SHU, the contradiction has now
evolved, with CDCr releasing its new regulatory policy language
governing "Security Threat Group Management," and the 9th Circuit Courts
releasing two pro-torture rulings, which viewed in their
interconnections, represent the state's response to our challenge to
their cultural dominance. The message is clear: "You are slaves; we will
continue to treat you as slaves; and we refuse to have our
socio-political dominance challenged by slaves."
The reactionary view of reality shuts its eyes to its own authoritarian
contradictions and the conditions of the people. Political reaction
reflexively makes use of those social forces that oppose progress; it
automatically consolidates to defend its dominance over the People's
lives. Instead of capitulating to progressive social forces and ending
torture in SHU units, the state has closed ranks and seeks to redefine
the nature of the conflict itself by redefining the language (i.e.
semantics) in its policy governing STG validation and torture unit
confinement. In true reactionary fashion they've adopted language that
reduces (and in some cases eliminates) its burden to establish a factual
basis of genuine criminal behavior on the part of those subject to these
policies, while simultaneously increasing the burden on prisoners, /and
the People/, to avoid falling prey to these new regulations which in
essence criminalize /anything/ those "validated" as STG's do, say, or
think.... all with the explicit support of the courts. To truly
understand the degree of political reaction at play here, we must first
acknowledge the role of authoritarian institutions in U.S. society.
Authoritarian society reproduces itself in the individual structures of
the masses (through its economic system, ideology, and culture) with the
help of authoritarian institutions (i.e. school, courts, church, prison,
etc.). It thus logically proceeds that political reaction has to regard
and defend these authoritarian institutions /as the foundation/ of the
state, culture, and capitalist civilization itself.
When these authoritarian institutions are challenged in the arena of
public opinion-and are found lacking as they have been in this stuggle
-the very foundation of the authoritarian social order is undermined,
and a corresponding shift in the consciousness and character structure
of the People follows. This, in turn, threatens the authoritarian mass
psychology in America. The state can not allow this, and so their
reactionary defense response is to delegitimize, to criminalize, to
vilify those actors and activities who, in their view, are making a
significant contribution to this process; in this case, activists,
politically conscious prisoners, and their contemporaries. This policy
is the state's effort to forestall our continued contributions to
changing the dynamics of cultural hegemony in the U.S., and the language
of the regulations makes that clear.
The offensive content in the newly released regulatory language is far
too voluminous for us to address each and every point. Instead, we wish
to share with you some of the grosser contradictions in hopes you will
not only see the contrapositive aim of the state (to maintain SHU
torture units as coercive leverage to psychologically bend or break
prisoners), but also gain a deeper understanding of the social forces
acting upon us all. The language of CDCr's STG/SDP Management policy
(released as a /Directors Rules Change/), like the irrational character
structure of reactionary man upon which the state is based, is a study
in contradictions. CDCr's "Background" and "Purpose"-language for the
new policy on the one hand contends,
"California (STG's) are routinely and consistently connected to
major criminal activities in communities, including such crimes as
homicides, drug trafficking, prostitution, human trafficking, and
extortion...(STG's) are largely responsible for criminal activities
within institutions, to include the trafficking of narcotics,
committing and/or directing violence.. and directing criminal
activity..."
... while on the other hand the "STG Disciplinary Matrix
<http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Regulations/Adult_Operations/docs/NCDR/2014NCR/14-02/Text_of_Proposed_Regulations.pdf>"
(p. 43-) they've developed is dedicated largely to elevating petty,
innocuous, non-criminal activities and matter to the level of "criminal
STG behavior."
Why would their public propaganda hype these serious and violent crimes
as the focus of state interest, while the policy itself focuses
primarily on criminalizing things which are in fact /not/ crimes? The
answer is as obvious as it is condemning: MOST PRISONERS VALIDATED AS
"STG AFFILIATES" AND CONFINED TO SHU TORTURE UNITS HAVE NOT COMMITED ANY
SUCH CRIMES WHILE IN PRISON, AND MANY HAVE IN FACT /DONE NOTHING/ AT ALL.
Never the less, the state must re-create a basis upon which the primary
end of the SHU torture unit will not only be maintained, but reborn :
The aim of breaking men's minds. However, the reactionary politician can
not divulge his actual intentions in his propaganda. We doubt if anyone
(even other reactionaries) would have responded positively to a CDCr
statement of intent to break some men's minds, brainwash others, and
indefinitely torture the rest. In political propaganda- which much of
this new STG policy is -it is a question of producing a psychological
effect in masses of people. In you. One that seeks to legitimize what is
clearly the maintenance of torture by another name, and your support for
that legitimacy. Let's take a look.
The "STG Disciplinary Matrix
<http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Regulations/Adult_Operations/docs/NCDR/2014NCR/14-02/Text_of_Proposed_Regulations.pdf>"
(§3378.4) (pp. 43-46) criminalizes "conversations," "greeting cards,"
"clothing," "communications with offenders/others," "group exercise,"
"handshakes," "artwork," and believe it or not, a "color." That all of
these "behaviors" are left to the imagination and interpretation of
prison staff only increases the arbitrary standard attached to
criminalizing activities and matter which are not of themselves
"criminal." It makes sense, after decades of presiding over the
brutalization and degradation of validated SHU prisoners, that these
staff members maintain a vested interest in ensuring imprisoned human
rights activists remain isolated or broken.
To be sure, new §3378.2(7)
<http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Regulations/Adult_Operations/docs/NCDR/2014NCR/14-02/Text_of_Proposed_Regulations.pdf>
allows to "staff visual and audible observations" (p. 22) to be
actionable as "STG Offences" which can and will land you in (and/or keep
you in) a SHU torture unit.
The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states, "Congress shall
make no law.. abridging the freedom of speech," yet apparently CDCr
can, and /is/ doing just that. They have included new language,
specifically intended to criminalize peaceful protest action against SHU
torture units, SHU abolition activists, and rights groups as "STG
Behaviors or Activities."
New language in §3315(a)(3)(AA)
<http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Regulations/Adult_Operations/docs/NCDR/2014NCR/14-02/Text_of_Proposed_Regulations.pdf>
prohibits protestation, while §3315(a)(3)(Z)
<http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Regulations/Adult_Operations/docs/NCDR/2014NCR/14-02/Text_of_Proposed_Regulations.pdf>
gives CDCr a basis to charge representatives as protest "leaders."
New §3323(h)(12) (8)
<http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Regulations/Adult_Operations/docs/NCDR/2014NCR/14-02/Text_of_Proposed_Regulations.pdf>
prohibits "communication between offenders/others in support or
furtherance of STG activities or behaviors," which includes letters or
discussions surrounding peaceful protest actions against SHU torture
units. To be sure, they have even introduced language which criminalizes
/visits/ between prisoners and Human Rights groups who do, or have in
the past, supported peaceful protest actions against SHU torture units.
On p. 9 of the policy (§3378.7(9)
<http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Regulations/Adult_Operations/docs/NCDR/2014NCR/14-02/Text_of_Proposed_Regulations.pdf>)
outlines violations for "visits from persons or entities that are
documented as willfully promoting, furthering or assisting STG
affiliates in activities associated with the STG." In every hunger
strike-related 115 issued, and in countless pro-P.I.C. articles, CDCr
and some mass media elements, have consistently reduced it to "gang
activity." This means the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional
Law, P.H.S.S., C.F.A.S.C., Our Lives Matter, Prison Watch Network,
C.P.F., L.S.P.C. and countless other progressive human rights entities,
journalists and individual activists who oppose the preservation of
torture in their society are subject to "validation" as an "STG," and
those prisoners conferring with them are in turn subject to sanctions.
The First Amendment prohibits any regulation "Abridging the...right to
peaceably assemble, and to petition government for a redress of
grievances," yet again CDCr seems to have not gotten the memo. In the
circuitous logic of irrational authoritarian man they seek to create new
laws to protect their capacity to violate established law. Organizing to
resist state-sponsored torture is not a crime. So again we ask you, why
does CDCr's "Initial Statement of Reasons" cite this litany of serious
and violent crimes, yet its regulations focus on activities and matter
which are not themselves criminal?
Under the language in this policy CDCr can (and surely will) criminalize
/anything/ prisoners- and some of you in 'society' reading this now-
say, think, or do. The only "safe" activity we may possibly engage in is
exiting our cells and taking a breath... however, if one were to take 2
/deep breaths/, one may be cited for "STG Harrasment-Directly or
Indirectly," because some CDCr staff person may be intimidated by how
your breathing. To be sure, they've actually introduced an unspecific
category of STG misconduct in §3378.4(a)(3)(M)
<http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Regulations/Adult_Operations/docs/NCDR/2014NCR/14-02/Text_of_Proposed_Regulations.pdf>
termed "Unique Behaviors" that is actually whatever the state wants it
to be.
CDCr, making their authoritarian political position clear, posits in its
"Statementof Reasons
<http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Regulations/Adult_Operations/docs/NCDR/2014NCR/14-01/Initial%20Statement%20of%20Reasons.pdf>"
surrounding §3378.4(c)(7) that behavior need /not/ be actionable as a
rules violation to be used to validate prisoners or retain them in SHU
torture units (see p.31 of the policy). CDCr has included this language
despite having touted to every media outlet and public official who
would listen that they are "moving to a behavior based model." It is a
contradiction, wrapped in a lie, cloaked in semantics.
Yet as fundamentally contradictory and irrational as it is to
criminalize activity and matter which is not criminal, to increase the
magnitude of petty offences and observations which can land prisoners in
a SHU torture unit; what's equally offensive is they've actually lowered
the bar for themselves in proving if such matter is actually "STG"-
related. If you go to p.23, at §3375.3-CODE G
<http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Regulations/Adult_Operations/docs/NCDR/2014NCR/14-02/Text_of_Proposed_Regulations.pdf>,
CDCr can establish STG association /without/ having to show direct
contact with a validated STG affiliate. Exactly how anyone can
rationally demonstrate how someone is associating with someone else
without having to show they've associated at all is mind boggling. Yet,
if we move to the new language on "Direct Links" (for validation
purposes) on p.35 we find that unilateral action by either party is
sufficient to demonstrate a "direct link" to an STG, and CDCr staff need
/not/ establish that the subject knew the other was 'validated' as an
STG, or knew each other /at all/. Under this rubric, /any/ of you
reading this right now could write an N.C.T.T. coordinator here in
Corcoran or at Pelican Bay SHU, having never met or known us outside of
reading this article, and find yourself "validated" with a "direct link"
to an STG. Does this strike you as a means to combat "homicides,
narcotics trafficking, and extortion," or a means to combat political
progress, to criminalize and sanction segments of the population who've
exposed and damaged their inhumane agenda politically and socially?
Throughout the regulatory language there has been a great emphasis on
"criminal STG behavior," even making things which are not behaviors
"behavior" (clothing, artwork, handshakes, etc.) -yet contradicting this
all, on p.35 they create a loophole for themselves (just in case the STG
Disciplinary Matrix isn't enough) stating placement in SHU/SDP, or
validation as an STG affiliate, does /not/ need to occur with behavior,
"source criteria" alone is enough. To be sure, though they contend
they've put a 4 year cap on the "age" of "source criteria" (information)
used for STG purposes, they have included another loophole for
themselves on the same page which actually expands the time frame for
using "source criteria" to "anytime in the individuals personal STG
history." How they are able to assert such contradictions under color of
law is a riddle which should concern every citizen and inhabitant of the
U.S... Unfortunately the answer to this riddle is even more disturbing.
*Judicial Collusion*
It is the fact of /judicial collusion/ which allows for such abuses. For
example, CDCr has made a great deal about the new provisions which are
supposed to ensure confidential informants/information used to validate
or place prisoners in SHU under STG regulations must be /independently/
corroborated before it can be used. However, new §3321(b) (1) includes
language which completely undermines this by stating, "other
circumstantial evidence" may be used to "corroborate" confidential
informants/information (1030's). We have recently discovered
"investigation" is sufficient "corroboration" under this "other
circumstantial evidence" standard. In other words, they can have an
informant say you had plans to blow-up a gun tower, and that informant
becomes "corroborated" when they "investigate" this baseless lie. Under
this logic, "corroboration" is just empty semantics.
However ridiculous this sounds, they have no fear of the courts striking
such an absurdity down because in a recent ruling on Brother Zaharibu's
9th Circuit appeal, the courts took the position /THE ACTUAL EVIDENCE
DOES'NT EVEN HAVE TO EXIST/ - AS LONG AS THE RIGHT BOXES ARE CHECKED ON
THE 1030 form, THAT'S "SOME EVIDENCE." The evidence the 1030 is supposed
to be based on does not have to exist at all. The 'word' of CDCr staff,
according to the courts, is good enough for them. Mind you, this ruling
comes on the heels of the third Hunger Strike, only days before recent
legislative hearings on SHU torture units, and almost simultaneously as
these regulations were being released. As it stands, IGI/Prison Staff
can say /anything/ on a 1030, check some boxes, and you'll receive a 115
and a 4-year to indefinite SHU term in CDCr's SDP-and the courts will
support this.
Judicial collusion in the maintenance of SHU torture units is long
standing and pervasive in the U.S., and in California in particular,
(see, /Ruiz v. Estelle/, /Coleman v. Wilson/, /Madrid v. Gomez/, /In Re
Castillo/, /Koch v. Lewis /[AZ]
<http://www.leagle.com/decision/20011210216FSupp2d994_11116.xml/KOCH%20v.%20LEWIS>,
etc.). Despite the massive public outcry against the perpetuation of SHU
torture units in America, the 9th Circuit court (in apparent reactionary
support of CDCr's maintance of the practice) is actually reversing
progressive District court rulings /when they favor prisoners subjected
to long-term SHU torture/.
In /In Re Griffin/ the District Court ordered CDCr, on three separate
occasions, to release Griffin to the general population (G.P.), or a
less restrictive environment than SHU. After several moves to mock the
court's ruling, such as moving Griffin from Pelican Bay SHU to Corcoran
SHU, which failed miserably after the District Judge toured Corcoran SHU
and told CDCr they were not in compliance with the order, CDCr basically
took the position they'd go to jail before they released him to the
G.P.. The 9th Circuit finally weighed in. The Attorney General,
representing CDCr passed on to the court some speculative information
provided by OCS, and the 9th Circuit in essence took the position the
District Court made an error by abiding by the Constitution in Griffin's
case. The 9th Circuit Court rebuked the District Courts' findings that
over 2 decades in the SHU, simply because one would not debrief, /does/
in fact violate the Eighth Amendment. The 9th Circuit Courts position is
that torture Is not cruel and unusual as long as it's a validated
prisoner on the receiving end, and further held (based on whatever
information OCS trumped up) that Griffin could "earn his way back into
Pelican Bay." They made no move to enforce the District Courts order to
release Griffin to the general population or to sanction CDCR for
repeatedly disregarding the order.
That CDCr has been maintaining the largest collection of torture units
in the U.S. is the best proof the courts will defend the integrity of
authoritarian institutions before it upholds its own 'law.' Which is why
it should come as no surprise that CDCr can assert in its "Evaluation of
Consistency/ Compatability WithExisting Laws/Regulations
<http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Regulations/Adult_Operations/docs/NCDR/2013NCR/13-04/Notice%20of%20Proposed%20Regulations%20.pdf>"
(p. 2) that: "The Department has researched existing statutes and
regulations and has determined that these proposed regulations and has
determined that these proposed regulations are not inconsistent...with
existing laws"... then turn around and violate the very statutes it
cites as its controlling language with impunity. To state that many of
the provisions of this policy violate the 1st, 8th, and 14th Amendments
is too obvious, and frankly too easy. Let's go for the less obvious.
If we look on p.3 of the "Initial Statement of Reasons
<https://www.blogger.com/%5Bhttp://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Regulations/Adult_Operations/docs/NCDR/2014NCR/14-01/Initial%20Statement%20of%20Reasons.pdf>,"
CDCr cites /Castillo v. Alameida/ [/Castillo v. Alameida/, Case No.
C-94-2847-MJJ (N.D.Cal.) ] as controlling case law, yet throughout the
policy "laundry lists" of every sort (i.e., membership lists, enemy
lists, roll-call lists, etc, see-p.14, §3323(h)(12)(E);
p.22,§3375.3(a)(4)(B)(3); p.36, 0378.2(5); p.45, STG MATRIX, Sec.6(g),
etc., etc.) are cited as legitimate "source criteria."
The '/Castillo/' settlement agreement expressly prohibits the use of
such laundry lists for validation/SHU placement purposes. The
'/Castillo'/ settlement agreement (CIVIL NO.C-94-2847) on p.7, at point
21 states, "Defendants (CDCr) agree that "laundry lists" shall /not/ be
relied on as a source item," yet in spite of this they've added new
provisions for additional "laundry list" classifications, such as
'roll-call lists.' CDCr's regulatory semantics and the courts collusion
in their maintenance and perpetuation must be seen for what they are:
This is /THE STATE'S/-- response to the Protest Movement responsible for
exposing its contradictions and inspiring resistance from multiple
segments of society. As one apparatus of the authoritarian state becomes
intransigent in the face of change, others leap to support it (in this
case the courts, the Govenor's Office, conservative mass media, and The
Dept. of Justice) on a broader and broader basis giving the /appearance/
of a shift back in the struggle for cultural hegemony in their favor.
This, of course, results is a further deepening of the contradiction in
the peoples character structure between reactionary and freedom loving
tendencies; not simply among the broader masses but those actively
engaged in, or supportive of, the struggle as well. However, such
vacillation is insufficient to reassert continuity in the authoritarian
order... or to halt determined spirits from actively seeking to
transform the nature and structure of capitalist society and structure
of capitalist society and it's institutions in America. Therefore, the
state must resort to other measures: Enter the Step-Down Program.
CDCr's Step Down Program, as we've already explained in a series of
dissertations, is simply a sham system by which CDCr seeks to leverage
indefinite torture in SHU to coerce those subject to it to submit to
psychological reprograming consistent with the social values of the
authoritarian state. According to these new regulations, should you
resist this ideological (re)assimilation you will remain in the torture
unit indefinitely-and you (not the state) are then "responsible" for
your own torture. On p.41 of the policy (3378.3(a)(2)) they state,
"Each step provides progams and privileges and, it is the
responsibility of the affiliate to demonstrate they can be released
to a less restrictive environment while abstaining from STG
behaviors If the offender chooses not to progress through any step
of the program the offender may be returned, by ICC, to one of the
previous steps until they demonstrate appropriate behavior for
movement into the next step. Any time the inmate wishes to begin
participating in the SDP, they may notify their assigned counselor..."
As we've already demonstrated, "abstaining from STG behaviors" is next
to impossible under these new "regulations" which criminalize everything
from a hand shake to a conversation, but when they speak of "appropriate
behavior," exactly what are they talking about? For the answer we must
go to the "SDPNotice of Expectations
<http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Regulations/Adult_Operations/docs/NCDR/2014NCR/14-02/Text_of_Proposed_Regulations.pdf>"
[p. 41]. There is a "Notice" for each step (1-5), with each containing 5
to 7 'expectation' points, depending on which step you've been assigned
to. The most obvious and glaring contradictions of the SDP, and what
actually reveals the states /true/ motivation here, is the fact that
only 1 of the expectation points has any association to legitimate
penological interests as it relates to "behavior" in prison: "Remain
disciplinary free adhering to all Departmental rules and regulations."
Now if CDCr were sincere in their assertion that "The SDP will be a
individually behavior based program" one would need only "remain
disciplinary free" for 4 years and be released to the general population
in step-5. This however is /not/ the actual intent of the SDP...
subordinating the population to the authoritarian dictates of the state is.
Under this new policy you can be disciplinary free for decades (as most
current indeterminate SHU prisoners are today) and /never be released
from SHU/. This is not simply a "behavior based" program (despite the
term "behavior" being such an ambiguous term to CDCr) as you are also
expected to "participate in and successfully complete all mandated
educational and cognitive (restructuring) instruction (including
self-directed journals), as well as risk-educational assessment, as
determined by ICC."
They also expect you to "follow all staff recommendations and
directions," as a part of "positive" SDP participation. Since we've
already made a definitive analysis
<http://www.ncttcorshu.org/2014/01/declining-deal-with-devil-coercive.html>
of the cognitive restructuring
<http://www.ncttcorshu.org/2013/12/legislative-alert-cdcrs-step-down-pilot.html>
and forensic profiling components of §700.2 of the SDP and COMPAS
assessment in 3 previous NCTT-Cor-SHU analyses
<http://www.ncttcorshu.org/2013/03/creating-broken-men-pt-2.html>, there
is no need to do so again here. What is necessary for us to discuss here
is why this duplicitous contradiction is so necessary to the state's
efforts to reassert political reaction in populations currently
committed to progressive struggle.
Our struggle to abolish SHU torture units is inextricably linked to the
broader struggle to seize cultural hegemony in the U.S. from the ruling
class and it's tool, the state. This struggle has contributed to
progressively changing attitudes in society and prisons. Our collective
efforts have repeatedly exposed the state's contradictions and sparked
the Peoples appetite for freedom and new social relationships. These
activities undermine the reactionary character structure upon which
authoritarian society is based. These actions are thus revolutionary.
"Revolution" is, at heart, "a war for the minds of the masses," it moves
us positively from one way of life and set of social values, to one more
conducive to principles of collective life. The state makes no secret in
this new policy that reintroducing its "social values" is central to
their SDP' strategy. On p.2 of its "Initial Statement of Reasons
<http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Regulations/Adult_Operations/docs/NCDR/2014NCR/14-02/Initial_Statement_of_Reasons.pdf>,"
it states its "strategy is designed to [last point] "provide programs
designed to promote social values and behaviors in preparation for the
offender's return to the community." (p. 2)
It is only as a result of seeing the masses organize and resist its
callous inhumanity that the state now seeks to force the restructuring
of the "social values" of prisoners /at the source of this resistance/
to more closely reflect the dominant mass psychology (i.e. ideological
conformity). It is only when the suppressed segments of society begin to
organize themselves, begin to fight for socio-economic and political
improvements and raise the cultural level of the broader masses, that
moralistic inhibitions set in; only then do ruling elements, and their
tools, begin to show concern for the "values" and "morality" of the
oppressed.
As organized resistance rises, so does a contrary process activate in
direct proportion from the state: The ideological assimilation to the
ruling class. However, such a process among the prison class and lumpen
strata (where oppression is a constant of existence) is simply not as
easily achieved as it is in the middle class. Consciousness, relatively
speaking, is directly proportional to oppression. Couple this fact with
the lumpen strata's desperate historic relationship to the productive
system and the daily assaults on our humanity that all prisoners endure,
and the prospect of conforming to authoritarian dictates, or being
ideologically assimilated by mundane means to just accepting the role of
oppressed man is simply unrealistic to say the least. Thus the /need/,
the requirement, the mandate of the state that all prisoners subject to
the SDP must submit to cognitive restructuring or face the prospect of
continued indefinite torture.
If we view the state's response in these regulatory and judicial
positions within their correct social, political, and historic context
it becomes clear this is an automatic, reactionary gambit to reawaken
contrary structural tendencies which lie active, dormant, or repressed
(depending on your relative degree of political maturity) in all of us
who've developed in the patriarchal-authoritarian miasma of capitalist
America. Concessions in this struggle, on the part of the state, have
thus far been superficial and cosmetic. The view of authoritarian
institutions is power does not concede-it compels.
We have demonstrated here how these policies and judgments are a
collection of contradictions justified by lies. As resistance to the
dictates of authoritarian ideology continues to spread and flare across
the surface of the American social structure, truth begins to intrude
rudely upon the hypocrisies and irrationalities at the foundation of
authoritarian society. The lines between the socially hostile microcosm
of prison and the politically reactionary macrocosm of society are being
blurred as progressive activists across the spectrum begin to join hands
across the walls with progressive and Revolutionary prisoners, producing
new social relationships, new political perspectives, and moving toward
truly Revolutinary (i.e., rational) character structures and ideology.
As we speak, ideas, rational ideas based in truth, like the Sustainable
Agricultural Commune
<http://www.ncttcorshu.org/p/the-sustainable-community-agricultural.html>,
the Pelican Bay Human Rights Movements' First Amendment Campaign, and
the Agreement to End Hostilities
<http://www.ncttcorshu.org/p/text-of-agreement-to-end-hostilities.html>
are finding resonance among the People, and taking root in communities
in society at large. These ideas are influencing -to a greater or lesser
degree- the mass psychology in America, and the state must move to stop
it, to prevent these ideas being fully manifested into a social force of
even greater transformative quality. Power thus reveals its nature in
its contradictions.
Wilhelm Reich, in his treatise, /The Human Struggle for Freedom/ observed:
"The dilemma is this: Without the power to put them into practice,
truths are of no use. They remain academic. Power, no matter what
kind of power it is, without a foundation in truth, is a
dictatorship, more or less and in one way or another, for it is
always based on man's fear of the social responsibility and personal
burden that "freedom" entails. Dictatorial power and truth do not go
together. They are mutually exclusive... "power" always means the
subjugation of others."
It is here finally, we strike at the "root" of the matter: The state's
preservation of dictatorial power is the origin of the lies and
contradictions within the new STG regulations and the judicial collusion
which allows them to move forward as a material force.
With all this in mind, state Assemblyman Tom Ammiano has sponsored a
bill
<http://asmdc.org/members/a17/news-room/press-releases/ammiano-introduces-bill-to-limit-use-of-solitary-confinement>
to cap "administrative" SHU confinement to a 3 year determinate term.
We've no doubt Mr. Ammiano is sincere in his genuine desire for
progressive change. However, CDCr, and the state they both represent, is
/not/. As we've demonstrated here, semantics is as viable as reality to
the state. If there is no explicit language stating the bill applies
retroactively, those who've been here for 10-40 years will have to spend
/another/ 3 years here. CDCr can take the position, the SDP is
"segregated housing" and /not/ SHU (though it is none the less in the
SHU and your torturous living conditions are no different) and continue
to hold you in the SHU for another 5 years to forever. Because the bill
speaks exclusively to validated SHU prisoners, with this new regulatory
language in mind, which manufactures an entirely new reality for
"behavior" (transforming non-criminal activity and matter into
"crimes"), it's a simple matter of having validated prisoners housed in
SHU issued repeated petty 115's-which could hold prisoners in SHU
indefinitely. SHU torture units are real, the human misery they are
responsible for is real, and the intent of the state to maintain this
practice is equally real.
There are some of us, despite this bill, that the state is simply /not/
going to release to a mainline. To be sure, these new regulations
contain provisions whereby, "...STG affiliates who are... in segregated
housing for non-disciplinary reasons with privileges associated... with
step-4 if they have completed the SDP but were retained for
non-disciplinary reasons." In other words, you can jump through every
hoop in the SDP, and /if/ they feel you have too much influence, or for
other Non-disciplinary reasons, they can keep you in step-4 (in the SHU)
indefinitely (see "/InitialStatement of Reasons
<http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Regulations/Adult_Operations/docs/NCDR/2014NCR/14-02/Initial_Statement_of_Reasons.pdf>/,"
p.12, §3044(j) through§3044(j) (2)(H)). With this in mind, if the
legislature will not consider restoring the "Prisoners Bill of Rights,"
perhaps at least they will consider including contact visits for those
housed in SHU for non-disciplinary reasons?
In the final analysis it is our collective determination to not simply
abolish SHU torture units, but to transform the sick culture and warped
ideology of this society which has allowed them to endure for so long
which, in turn, will realize a victorious Revolutionary change. The
Prison Industrial Complex is but one cog in the machinery of the
authoritarian order. Truly dismantling it requires striking at the very
foundation upon which this world is currently organized: THE
AUTHORITARIAN MASS PSYCHOLOGY OF REACTIONARY MAN/WOMAN. By changing our
minds and actions, we will change the world. This kind of change, a
Revolutionary change, only progresses in the crucible of struggle. Come
struggle with us.
We wish to leave you all with the wise words of Arundhati Roy: "Another
world is not only possible, she is on her way; on a quiet day I can hear
her breathing."
Until we win or don't lose.
N.C.T.T.-COR-SHU
For more information on the N.C.T.T.-COR-SHU, contact:
Michael (Zaharibu) Dorrough D-83611, 4B1L-#43
J. Heshima Denham J-38283, 4B1L-#43
Kambui Robinson C-82830, 4B1L-#49
Jabari Scott H-30536 4B1L-#63
CSP-COR-SHU
P.O. BOX 3481
Corcoran, CA. 93212
Facebook: Facebook.com/nctt.corshu.3
--
Freedom Archives 522 Valencia Street San Francisco, CA 94110 415
863.9977 www.freedomarchives.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/ppnews_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20140326/affafa0f/attachment.htm>
More information about the PPnews
mailing list