On the Continued Relevance of Scientific Socialism in our daily lives
By: Heshima Jinsai
© Heshima 2005
As we witness the gap between rich and poor widen by its largest margin in modern human history, while simultaneously experiencing an unprecedented rise in the “ I/me” mentality of selfishness, greed and avarice which the system of capitalism promotes across the race-class strata, it becomes prudent for us to make a scientific analysis of the reliance of our socio-economic world view. Scientific socialism, primarily, is an economic system where the means of production are in the hands of the people; where distribution of wealth, opportunity and materiel needs is equalitarian in nature. Scientific socialism is a system of non-exploitation and puts an end to the wage slave system and the fleecing by capitalist of the surplus value of labor. Scientific socialism’s central tenet is “From each person according to their talents, to each person according to their needs.”
This principle of socialist dialectics envisions a symbiosis of objective socio-economic output and objective human need/consumption, and reveals the fallacy in logic of proponents of market capitalism. Unlike the bureaucratic totalitarian economics of planned economics in the former eastern European Soviet era, scientific socialism employs a more stringent and all-inclusive standard of materialist analysis on both the “talents” and “needs” sides by ensuring society-wide input via the democratic centralist construction of each city block, town, and rural community. Scientific socialism respects the humanity of the individual by ensuring the finest and most advanced education and training in any field the citizen may desire, while mandating general indoctrination in our core principles and ideology – not only developing them to their ultimate potential, but strengthening and fitting them in the area of our socio-economic infrastructure where their talent, education/training and personal desires all converge with the needs of the collective society as a whole (divisions of labor, specialization). This ensures the freedom to do what you like to do while maximizing productivity through the joy and enthusiasm of working in a field you enjoy with the prospect of greater influence in that field should your performance prove exemplary.
Simultaneously, need at every level of human activity (material, spiritual, psychological, medical, cultural, entertainment, scientific, technological, fellowship, etc., etc.) is met in accordance with current conditions, and surpluses are distributed equally. With the means of production and distribution in the hands of the masses, the surplus value of labor, normally extracted as profits by the capitalist class, remains intact end distributed equally across the population. This ensures a maximization in the standard of living for all and not simply a minimum needs standard for most and an opulence standard for some. This is possible only through the strict adherence to the dictatorship of the proletariat as envisioned by Marx, Lenin, Mao and Jackson.
But scientific socialism is much more than this. Scientific socialism is also a psychology and culture exemplified by our ‘principles of collective life.’ It’s a way of thinking and living that is both egalitarian and compassionate. Scientific socialists have largeness of mind. Are selfless and caring, and care more for the needs and welfare of others than for themselves.
In contrast, market capitalism has made a science of behavior modification in marketing its goods and services and promoting the fantasy that multiple, attainable paths to wealth, power and opulence exist for everyone if they are only willing to “work hard enough to attain ‘the American dream.’” This divorces the minds of the masses from the reality that capitalism presupposes the necessity of unemployed (surplus labor) and under employed (competitive class labor pool) to ensure the wage and class systems function. There is an underlying psychological phenomenon I’ve coined, “The Success Brainwashing Method” which I define as the systematic psychological conditioning of capitalist indoctrination that begins at infancy and is reinforced throughout life which enforces the premise that a man’s / woman’s worth as a human in this society is directly proportional to their ability to make money, attain upward class mobility, or achieve the trappings thereof (i.e. jewelry, fine cars, expensive clothing etc., etc.).
The motive force behind this phenomena focuses efforts on one’s individual gain and self-interest, if need be, at the expense of others – even celebrating one’ s ability to dispense with ethical standards which would impede the realization or maximization of material wealth (i.e. exploitation, betrayal, usury, manipulation, fraud, theft, misappropriation). This psychological construct encourages “getting over” on, or at the loss of, others and is all perfectly allowable; if skillfully done, it is even encouraged – no matter the adverse effects on one’s community(s), personal relationships, or even themselves. Capitalism as a productive system has as its primary motivation the development of super-profits and the growth of its markets and influence on the natural resources, political structures, and labor which sustains them. The capitalist extracts the surplus value of the worker’s labor as profits or super-profits and is obsessed with finding new ways of reducing costs and maximizing profits at the expense of labor and consumers.
The capitalist state is a tool to ensure the dominance of one class (the ruling or “capitalist” class) over the others and does so through the economic and social stratification of society via the two primary components of the capitalist state: 1) the economic class system and 2) the race/gender caste system. Racism, xenophobia and sexism are key components of the global white supremacist motive force of capitalist, market economics. Each individual class is competing with and in opposition to, the other classes – and within their own – while the reinforced race antagonisms, anti-immigrant sentiment, and sexist attitudes ensure the necessary divisions are in place, and periodically intensified, to prevent broad class cooperation or proletariat / lumpen-proletariat united mass organization. Capitalism must ensure the existence of surplus labor (the unemployed / lumpen-proletariat) while simultaneously promoting social attitudes against this segment of the population as undesirable and / or “criminal” to ensure the remaining socio-economic strata act as a check on its revolutionary potential.
Criminalization of the poor has been woven into the very fabric of the social consciousness, while police state repression supports this notion by creating a pool of souls for the prison industrial complex to both profit from the disposal of this surplus labor and act as a deterrent against effective organization (or even accurate identification of the people’s ills) at this level of society. It is though this highly refined system of racial automation which combines the psychological incentive of potential wealth with the deterrent of underlying force /violence, of divide and rule at every level of human activity, where in the ruling class’ monopoly on control is grounded. The difficulty in popularizing any alternative socio-economic system rests here. Here in the U.S., Yankee-style capitalism has systematically conditioned its population against broad based cooperation or cooperation which could threaten the continuation and expansion of exploitation of man by man.
To understand the clear polarization between these two systems of thought and production I have enclosed a thirteen (13) point comparison in simple terms of the two modes of thought (see attachment-[missing]).
Despite the inherently avaricious culture of capitalism and its facade of glitz and universal privilege, scientific socialism and principles of collective life can be popularized in the under end working classes of the capitalist economy by creating and successfully implementing programs that meet the needs of the people, providing an alternative to lift the yoke of poverty and perpetual toil from their backs without the need to abandon their humanity.*
Humans are social creatures, and capitalism promotes social ties based solely on the individual interests of those tied together. Should those individual interests change, those social ties are as transient as the sunset. Principles of collective life base success on the strengthening of social ties at every level of human activity and looking upon the success of your fellow man/woman as your own because, quite literally, they are. The resultant, collective consciousness, this united mind is far better equipped to manufacture cooperative economic programs and collective work ventures, and is more efficient as it is consistent with the social nature of the human condition. This is uniquely true for the New Afrikan. Communalism, socialism’s evolutionary origin, is indigenous to our economic culture; harkening back to the very beginnings of the historical miscarriage and throughout our subsequent struggles for survival on the shores of North America.
We are here today because those principles have served us well, allowed us to endure through the most heinous privation, evolved and refined, end now find their highest expression in our Party. But, let ‘ s be clear, modern U.S society has never been more polarized between rich and poor while, simultaneously, being as self-interest orientated, avaricious and disconnected from one another. The advent of Barak Obama has resulted in no change in the status-quo. And the nature and composition of monopoly capitalism will only be transformed as a result of a victorious revolutionary change. The popularization of principals of collective life are the first concrete steps on that path (transfer culture) providing the psychological foundation for educating, organizing and mobilizing the people for scientific, socialist revolution.
But anything new is fraught with uncertainties and peril. The potential for mistakes is great – especially considering the reactionary nature of domestic U.S imperialism and its history of violent repression-
So, in this discussion it may be prudent to revisit some of the past mistakes in the implementation of socialism as a socio-economic and political system. Though ideologies are indigenous, surely there are things we can learn. Let’s see what a cursory examination of history reveals to us:
In the chattel slave uprisings and subsequent Haitian revolution of the 1700′ s, following the final military defeat of the French, Dessalines and his successors were so traumatized by the chattel slave experience that they oversaw the systematic destruction of every aspect of the Haitian, national economic infrastructure which reminded them of the institution of slavery. This included the entire transport, mining, agriculture, and warehousing infrastructure which made Haiti the single most profitable colony in the history of the colonial era.
Instead of appropriating and maintaining this productive capacity for themselves, after decimating the infrastructure they restored communalist economics emptying subsistence farming. So fearful were they of the return of the French, and being isolated by the other (meaning all) economic powers in the western hemisphere -this fledgling socialist commune paid billions of dollars to the French right up until 1948 effectively bankrupting Haiti and taking it from one of the most productive economies in the western hemisphere to the poorest. Had Dessalines, and those that came after him, simply abolished the oppressive end exploitive relationships upon which their enslavement was based, maintained the economic infrastructure and productive capacity of the nation while instituting the same communal, (socialist in practice) mode of distribution of wealth, goods and services, the demand for Haitian sugar, rubber and coffee, globally, would have been tapped via South American and Caribbean proxies (Haiti sent military aid to Cimon Bolivar in Venezuela in the 1800’s – they had the means) effectively breaking the U.S embargo, maintaining its prosperity, despite the payoffs to the French, and today we’d see a much different Haitian history and nation – and as communal socialists may well have lived in a much different world.
As father of fascism, many on the left conveniently forget that prior to the ultra-right wing, jackboot politics of “The new Pax Romana,” Benito Mussolini was a leading official in the Italian Socialist Party, an avowed Marxist (at least in self-description). So how then did he go from a proponent of the 1917 October Revolution in Russia to the ultra-reactionary book burning, race mysticism of fascist nationalism?
The answer is two-fold and was repeated only a short time later in Germany with the Brown Shirts and Hitler’s “National Socialist” NSDAP Party (the Nazis).
During the height of the Great Depression Italian socialists clung to mechanistic, Marxist economic dogma which failed to feed, house, clothe and warm the deprived Italian masses, while the sure economic benefits of seizing wealth and resources by force of arms from the “lesser nations and subject races to the greater glory of the “Pax Romana” and “The New Empire” were readily understandable and visually in reach. Mussolini argued their ability to conquer others and the inability of others to stop them was all the justification needed to legitimize the fascist enterprise – the Italian people agreed and supported him as did the German people with Hitler a short time later.
Which brings me to point 2) Mussolini understood what the mechanistic Marxist could not: the nature and structure of patriarchal, authoritarian, European society lent itself to the social manipulation of mysticism and ultra-nationalist zealotry. He understood that psychological constructs were more capable of influencing masses of people than were data or external, material conditions – the perceptions of which could be manipulated. Amazingly, the socialist of this time discounted the existence of “psychology” as an influence on social conditions, or even a verifiable factor, period – reducing man to mechanical processes alone. Hitler continuously stressed that one could not influence the masses with arguments, proofs and knowledge, but only with feelings and beliefs. These two points are exceedingly complex end interconnected, involving everything from the misapplication of dialectical materialism to patriarchal, authoritarian, sexual conservatism as a basis for ultra-right wing reaction.
But, for the sake of expediency, I ‘ll highlight a few key points and move on. The application of mechanistic Marxism as a tool for economic and social empowerment in Italy and Germany has fertile ground in the industrial workers sector, but its narrow interpretation applied solely to the sphere of subjective economic processes and government policies. It was thus, doomed from the outset. When it tried, and failed, to implement industrial and agricultural soviets to feed the starving masses of workers (due primarily to the opposition of industrial capitalist and their program of bloody sabotage and brutal intimidation), they also failed to note or comprehend the development of subjective contradictions within the minds of these same workers .
The socialists failed to make use of their own method of dialectical materialism to comprehend this new historical reality of fascism, which neither Marx or Engels had encountered, and Lenin recognized too late. It was not that the socialists of that time did not understand the progressive farces of society where its productive farces or the contradictions of as they related to real life. They wrote the book on it. Their failure was to understand the forces that retarded social progress (such as fascism) and degenerated into hollow formulas as opposed to assessing the concrete socio-economic and mass psychological factors of the social changes that extreme economic deprivation was creating. Instead of the economic crisis leaving the mass clearly to the left, it made them feint left then ride hard for the right. The result was a split between the economic basis developing to the left, and the ideology of broad levers of society developing to the right. The role of ideology and emotional attitudes, unanalyzed and uncontested by an oblivious left, had contradictory and devastating repercussions on the economic basis for change. The left did not understand that the basic structure of reactionary man’s mind, especially in patriarchal authoritarian Europe, was capable of subordinating its objective economic interests to its subjective emotional attitudes where no opposition to this tendency was present. The failure to address those material needs through socialism further underscored the potential inherent in this new uItra-nationalistic doctrine – fascism.
What Italy teaches us is two prime points and one cognizant lesson:
we cannot afford to field ineffective economic policies which fail to meet the people’s needs, they will reject us, and thus, their own interests.
It must be understood “… revolution is a war for the minds of the masses.”
The psychological structures of the masses, and our influence on those structures towards scientific, socialist economics and principles of collective life, are central to our entire struggle.
If you all recall, in a single generation, the New Afrikan colony went from the Black Liberation Movement to reverting back to right-wing lumpen-proletariat expressions (circa 1985 to present) as a direct outgrowth of multiple, adverse psychological factors (the loss of many New Afrikan teachers to integration and busing policies, the introduction of crack and popularization of narco-trafficking and social empowerment through gang warfare, a move to the right and rejection of radicalism amongst Reagan-era New Afrikan intellectuals and co-option of radical voices or marginalization of the same, a resurgence of Baptist Evangelical Christianity in the mid-west and south, etc.).
George’s statement that, “The principle reservoir of revolutionary potential in Amerika lies in wait inside the Black colony, its sheer numerical strength, its desperate historical relationship to the violence of the productive system and the fact of its present status in the creation of wealth, forces the Black stratum at the base of the whole class structure into the forefront of any revolutionary scheme”, is still true. Yet, the practical application of socialism – or true social change – is a remote one in the New Afrika colony.
The U.S. S. R’ s implementation of a bourgeois, bureaucratic state oligarchy under Stalin, in essence removing power from the Soviets and concentrating it in the Kremlin, abandoning the 3rd. revolutionary international, and purging its most advanced elements, (Lenin and Trotsky) sounded the death knell for soviet socialism. Which warns us of the danger of totalitarian sentiments and personality cultism in the political application of socialism. A trend that was repeated with Kruchev, Breznev and Gorbatchov – ultimately dismantling the mighty U.S.S.R under Yeltsin.
But for a more contemporary view of Stalinist, Bureaucratic deformation of a socialist economy – we need look no further than China. In China we find a deformed worker’s state strangled by the global capitalist construct into accepting market reformation, in which a privileged, parasitic bureaucracy sits atop collectivized property relationships developed by the glorious 1949 revolution! Guided by a desire to protect its privileges, the bureaucracy defends state property only to the extent it fears the working masses.
As scientific socialists, we see collective economics based on democratic centralist planning as essential for truly developing the productive forces of society. We seek to liberate the creative and imaginative powers of humanity, which have been shackled by capitalism and class divisions. This brings us to the second flaw inherent in the Chinese approach to socialism which doomed it from the outset: single state socialism.
Capitalism is a global monopoly construct that, though competing with one another, unifies as a reactionary survival mechanism against anything resembling revolutionary, scientific socialism. The concept of “single state socialism”, or juche as it’s known in North Korea (the legacy of Il Jung Kim), in essence, dooms a socialist economy to the whims of monopoly capitalist pressures (through trade embargoes and other restrictions on natural resources or technology necessary to run a modern industrialized nation that cannot be domestically found, refined or produced by the socialist state in sufficient volume to meet its needs or on par with the capitalist), eventually resulting in capitulation to “market reforms” or becoming a vassal nation of another power (i.e., North Korea is a vassal state of China).
The very conception of a truly socialist future presupposes a global economic order based on the seizure of the productive resources of the advanced capitalist states through international revolutionary war. There is an inherent tendency (where personality cult does not overshadow as in North Korea) for Stalinist bureaucracy to abandon true socialism in favor of “market reforms ” with output and prices determined through micronized competition between enterprises; wages geared to enterprise profitability, price subsidies are eliminated resulting in higher inflation, the role of petty capitalist entrepreneurs is expanded, increased commercial and financial ties to western and Japanese capitalism, including joint ventures are encouraged. This all strengthens the internal forces of capitalist counter-revolution. Mao made his mistake in economic policy development by basing it on bureaucratic commands and arbitrariness instead of socialist democracy (workers communes). Trotsky, in his piece, “The Revolution Betrayed”, said of the U.S.S.R under Stalin that “Soviet products are as though branded with the gray label of indifference, under a nationalized (socialist) economy , quality demands a democracy of producers and consumers, freedom of criticism and initiative – conditions incompatible with a totalitarian regime of fear, lies end flattery (which the U.S.S.R had become under Stalin).” When we speak of political and economic revolution to establish a collective democracy it must strengthen, not weaken, the scientific socialist commune.
This dogma of “socialism in one country” is anti-socialistic. The problem of privation in the rural areas of China, across North Korea, the entire world for that matter, can only be resolved through successful international socialist revolution. To underscore this point, the entire concept of “socialism in one country” is the bureaucracies’ fruitless pursuit for “peaceful coexistence” with imperialism, a position that has undermined the defense of socialists end socialist states, not least through the betrayal of socialist revolutions internationally. Any serious talk of successful, international, socialist revolution will be decided here in the belly of the imperialist U.S beast. The lessons here are clear, ideological consistency and advance of democratic totalitarianism is central to our socialist ambitions – and we have not won until we win the World (our positive objective).
The core psychologies of socialism and capitalism are diametrically opposed to one another, their care values and motive forces in perpetual conflict. Scientific socialism is guided by principles of collective life which holds genuine concern for one’s fellow man/woman as a preeminent consideration, and puts the interests of the collective before one’s own. In contrast, capitalist psychology promotes such concepts as Gordon Gekko’s iconic “greed is good” diatribe from the movie “Wall Street” and places self -interest as the central psychological concern. Key to reinforcing this psychological state is the basis of competition as the catalyst for innovation and productivity, as a form or socio-economic “natural selection,” appealing to the basest and most predatory instincts of the human social creature. Key to the maximization of competition among workers and enterprises is the “incentive interest.” One of the prevailing arguments made by supporters of market capitalism is that the per capita productivity of wage-based labor (capitalist) is superior to that in socialist economies because superior performance is rewarded with additional material wealth which, in turn, translates into a higher standard of living amongst the populations of capitalist states. This material interest itself translates into a higher interest for capita list states workers to work harder, be more productive, and compete more intensely with other workers for the notice of management or owners which will translate into promotion(s) or increased wages – the material incentive. It is the position of market, capitalist economies that the productive power of capitalism, both individually and nationally (i.e., gross domestic product) will always outstrip that in socialist economies because the incentive interest is present in capitalist economies and absent in socialist economies. Scientific socialist, unlike vulgar Marxist, mechanistic socialist, or dogmatic “MLM” (Marxism, Leninism, Maoism) ideologies, employs dialectical materialism – not communist cannon – as the primary tool of analysis, dispassionately and objectively and there is no dispute that the additional stock option, performance-based Christmas bonus, or company car are all effective incentives to increase productivity.
The simple fact that selling one’s labor to those who own the means of production is the sole “legal” way for workers to generate money to survive in a capitalist economy, and the incentive interest is a clear path to more of that precious cash, clearly supports a motivation to increase labor productivity. If we analyze the few remaining, practicing socialist economies in relation to nations in the global capitalist construct with equitable populations and land mass – at first glance it’ s clear the capitalist states (i.e., Thailand (capitalist) vs. Vietnam (socialist) ) G.D.P far outstrips the socialist ones (i.e., the Bahamas vs. Cuba). But what is conveniently overlooked by capitalist economists is the incentive interest of capitalism notwithstanding, capitalism is a global construct of interconnected markets that support global growth while, simultaneously competing within this network of economies. The work force and industries of Thailand or the Bahamas do not have to contend with the economic sanctions, trade embargos/limitations, import tariffs and technological exclusion acts that the labor force of Vietnam or Cuba have to contend with which are designed to intentionally undermine the productive capacity and success of these socialist economies.
Such restrictions by global capitalist states are eased only to the degree that “market reforms” in these socialist states allow for the penetration of capital, exploitation of resources or labor, end access to consumers, all of which deforms the workers state end sets the stage for capitalist counterrevolution. Nevertheless, it would be unscientific to deny the productive and innovative impact of the material incentive interest in a capitalist economy. But, is this material incentive a necessary component of human productive capacity? Can man be motivated to higher performance by some incentive other than more cash? This is an important question if we’re seriously speaking of convincing the people to abandon market capitalism in favor of scientific socialism.
It is my contention that the objective economic conditions of a capitalist economy make the incentive interest a key subjective psychological factor for the acceptance of wage slavery and active participation in their own exploitation. Inversely, it is also my contention that the objective economic conditions of a scientific, socialist economy (where material needs are met by the commune) make the material incentive interest an unnecessary component, and the subjective psychological considerations of principles of collective life and the influence incentive of democratic, centralist organization sufficient motivation for equal, if not more, productive labor capacity.
Economist from Harvard University conducted an experiment with ninth grade students where they were offered a relatively significant cash reward, and the chance for more, if they maintained minimum, educational standards set by the researchers. The researchers were shocked to find a paltry 30% increase in educational performance set by the study – and one of the subjects highlighted in the study, an intentional underachiever – the popular guy and class clown – made a conscious decision that he could not trade his social life and peer standing for the effort necessary to get the cash. For this kid, and a significant number of others, the social empowerment of the peer group was a greater Incentive than the cash.
I raised this point in defense of socialism’s psychological incentive (principles of collective life) vs. the material incentive of capitalism with a friend in a conversation on the yard – his reply was: “The kid would have made a different choice if he had bills to pay.” I couldn’t argue with that point, yet it only served to underscore the compulsion of self-interest-orientated psychologies (the “I/Me” mentality) that are the hallmark of capitalism.
I also noted the flaw here in the assessment: in a socialist state, your “bills” are non-existent as your material needs are addressed by the commune. It is my contention that in a scientific, socialist economy, where survival is not contingent on the wage slave system of competitive labor, the desire to increase the prosperity of the collective and the incentive of having greater influence if you have greater insight, skill or ability in a specific field, is sufficient incentive to maximize human productive advancement and innovation. Thought (subjective) is the origin of actions which forge the material world (objective) – simultaneously, it is the objective, material conditions of life which influence what, and how we think. Living in a society where egalitarian mores are the norm, where human need is the primary motivation for material production and distribution, where being generous, sharing and selfless is virtuous not “naïve” or “perilous,” where the success of the collective is more vital than the desires of the individual, where everyone’s opinion has value and the most effective ideas are those that are adopted, will inevitably forge mindsets with motivations and incentive-triggers that are much different than those in a traditional, capitalist economy.
I, like all of us, was raised and developed in this malignant, bourgeoisie society – but, after making the transition and undergoing internal revolution many years ago – as a scientific socialist, I asked myself these same questions – and answered them frankly and honestly. Would I rather have my own freedom – or the freedom of our leading Party officials? Would I rather have $140.00 in supplies – or $20.00 worth for each of us here? Is the work I’m doing for myself – or for the Party, this body and the people (one in the same)? On and on I went -and in every instance I put the interests of the Party, people and our cause before myself and have done so for many, many years.
This, to me, signals (since I know so many others here of like mind) that our core psychology is not determined by mere objective, material conditions but also influenced by our concepts of truth and adhered to by our will and commitment to that truth. Principles of collective life are lived daily and influence every aspect of the socialists day-to-day activities.
So, how can we promote and popularize scientific socialism as a viable alternative in our own communities and daily lives? I believe it begins with the man himself, our daily practice and interactions with one another and the people. Practice selfless and equalitarian giving. Live generosity. If you are aware that someone needs something – and you can meet that need – do so without their even having to ask. In fact, actively inquire as to the needs and concerns of your Comrades and the people. Genuine concern should flow naturally and organically through your personal relationships. Facilitate cooperation among others and foster unity wherever you are. Actively think of new and imaginative ways you can strengthen and support the collective, and develop yourself and your abilities to their maximum potential so you will be more capable of making a meaningful contribution to the Collective, thereby, enriching us all. See the world and your place in it in terms of us and we – ensuring every decision is weighed with and against the interest of the Collective (the People and Party) first, and all else flowing therefrom. The popularization of scientific socialism, especially the revolutionary variety, in the context of a contra-positive authoritarian regime like capitalist Amerikkka is (and must be viewed as) an effort in social engineering which must involve both subjective and objective factors.
To that end we must, as an organization, develop, field and maintain community development initiatives and economic programs that effectively meet the people’s needs, popularizing the practice of communal economics strategically (we may well need to use different terms to identify these efforts in a population that’s been conditioned to fear and reject socialism/communism), while educating and organizing the traditionally most revolutionary segments of the population (i.e., the lumpen proletariat and proletariat).
For purposes of this discussion I’ll outline two (2) programs and one (1) organizing effort developed right here in this region, with elements in this body.
1) The Youth Community Action program (Y-CAP) – Y-CAP is both an educational / training program and a socialist, economic non-profit initiative (in disguise), which targets underclass youth and neighborhoods employing volunteers from the youth’s own community and family to work in concert with Y-CAP organizers in a two phase development initiative.
PHASE 1 – involves a five (5) times a week, 2 1/2 hour (after school) educational and training initiative that focuses on history (from the true perspective – think Zinn, Diop and Dela Valle), cultural awareness (to retard racial conflicts and strife between oppressed nationalities such as Mexicans and New Afrikans), computer and technological literacy, the arts and science / engineering.
Three out of five days a week the final hour will be devoted to martial arts, self-defense training, and strategic thought. Participants must comply with the participation requirements of phase one to be eligible for phase two inclusion.
PHASE 2 – involves establishing a collectively owned, community based business which each youth participant will own an equal stake in and be trained in the area of the venture which best suits them. All will receive equal pay / profit portion (collective work and responsibility, egalitarian distribution of wealth). The pilot venture will be a custom car garage (think “pimp my ride”) where we will seek in-kind donations of equipment and old cars (all tax deductible), cash donations, and fund raiser revenue to fund the rest. Volunteers from that industry will train each youth in exchange for marketing publicity for their own business. And we’ll seek industry related corporate sponsors (socio-economic guerrilla war – using the enemy’s own resources to strengthen you). The cars will be retrofitted, rebuilt and “pimped out” into custom low riders, ‘donks’ and Euro-tuners and put on the lot for sale and website auction. The proceeds from each sale or client fix-up will be split equally among the youth (50% of the profit). 20% will go to expand the non-profit initiative. 20% will go to a college fund for them all and 10% will flow back into expanding their venture. We, in this manner, provide them with an economic incentive to be indoctrinated into scientific socialist practices and revolutionary progressive politics; bring the community closer to one another and the Party (mass line organization), and introduce a new source of revenue into the underclass community where that chapter of Y-CAP is based.
2) Closed-Circuit Economic Commune – The C. C. E. Commune focuses its efforts in a single designated underclass community, educating the people on the concept of collective ownership of business ventures and equalitarian distribution of wealth and employment – going to churches, mosques, community centers, street corners, and door to door with a simple informative / survey pamphlet. The concept is based on the design of a closed circuit capacitor which increases and amplifies electrical wattage by recycling a current on itself through a catalyst element like ionized zinc phosphorous or cadmium.
A dollar circulates in the average Jewish community for forty seven (47) days; in the “white” community for thirty eight (38) days; in the South Korean community for twenty eight (28) days; in the Mexican community for fifteen (15) days. But in the New Afrikan community a dollar circulates for … 17 seconds. Yes seconds. Comrades, we own so few of the economic institutions in our communities that seventeen (17) seconds after we spend one of our dollars it’s enriching some other community. I point this out not to stoke race -caste antagonisms, but to illustrate how little economic organization exists in the New Afrikan colony.
The closed circuit economic model is one that intentionally re-circulates and grows wealth within the community it was generated in initially. For example – in the south east San Diego community of Skyline reside some 10-15 thousand residents. We will request $1.00-$2.00 every two weeks from each able resident that will go to a central fund for a six (6) month period. Analyzing the purchasing habits and preferences of the residents who will use the majority of the balance of that fund (est. $100K in six months) to purchase a business which offers that most purchased good/service – say a bakery – which will be collectively owned by everyone in the community on the C.C.E. registry. we will hire only people from that community who are unemployed. All the profits (minus overhead) will go back to the central fund with 70% being paid out monthly to all registers in the form of a dividend check – the other 30% gaining interest in the central fund. We will keep collecting the $1.00-$2.00 every two weeks, depositing it in the central fund – in another six months we purchase a “sympathetic/support business” – which is a venture that depends on our contributes to the initial venture – say a grocery store. The grocery store will purchase its baked goods inventory exclusively from the commune bakery. Again, the grocery store will hire only people from that community that do not have a job. Again we repeat the process. In the next six months a cannery and packaging factory – on and on. In each successive expansion of the C.C.E commune, the unemployment rate drops until eventually we reach 100% employment. The dividend checks will grow as the number and prosperity of businesses grow, and; inevitably, we will reach complete, community economic interconnection (multiple enterprises that all do business with or support one another and the community). The central fund will continue to grow until it is sufficiently capitalized to establish our own credit commune – where people from the community can get guaranteed micro-loans, home and auto financing and standard banking services – and the community itself – own and operates it all – while being its own customer at the same time. In this way, the community becomes entirely independent of the standard competitive, capitalist economy through cooperative economics and collective work, distribution, and ownership. Once a full circuit is closed – we move to the next community, developing interrelated ventures that compliment one another and each community successfully. We only touch the capitalist economy where our own innovation and enterprises fail to meet the capacity, or is simply unable to. By means of the C.C.E commune we can clearly demonstrate that cooperation serves the interests of the underclass where competition cannot – and will not. It is a brief ‘walk’ through transfer culture from here to scientific, socialist economics.
Finally, the proletariat / lumpen-proletariat alliance initiative is a simple organizing effort between politically conscious prisoners, industrial and service labor organizations, immigrant labor organizations and unemployed or under-employed workers with class consciousness to commit to supporting one another in their mutual, class interests. This includes, but is not limited to developing strategies to organize and coordinate the various sectors of the labor force to increase employment opportunities, working condition and profit margins and benefits. Prisoners will / can strike in solidarity with organized labor, and organized labor can strike and support legislation for prisoner’s rights and community reentry initiatives such as community-based parole boards. Advanced prisoners, such as this body, can serve as strategic think tanks, research committees, policy statement authors, and immigrant workers rights drafters – churning out articles, essays and pamphlets articulating the issues and agitating in the communities. One of the primary problems facing the popularization of socialism in this nation is the disorganization of these most revolutionary segments of the population. The success of union busters and co- option of organized labor by corporate and state special interests, and the success of divisive polities which has driven wedges between prisoners, organized labor and immigrant workers dating back to Thomas Dorrs and the Hay Market massacre. We have it in our power with pen, paper and envelopes to start reforging those bonds.
Revolutionary, scientific socialism is more relevant, more necessary, more urgent now than ever. As the Vanguard Party of the most revolutionary segment of the New Afrikan colony, and the North Amerikan population – it is our duty to seek its popularization and establish its roots wherever we can. We have a world to win – let our contributions and sacrifices reflect this intent. Think on these things, they are cause for great meditation.
* “Social alienation” is a central component of market ‘sales theory’ and brand promotion in capitalist systems.
Heshima Jinsai has published multiple articles in progressive publications such as the S.F. Bay View, Prison Focus, and Turning The Tide. One of many dynamic activists in the New Afrikan Revolutionary Nationalist Collective Think Tank (N.C.T.T.), he co-founded the State Raised Foundation, co-authored the 10 Core Objectives for Progress and Social Transformation, as well as the 3 Pilot Programs. Imprisoned since 1993, he has been a tireless advocate for scientific socialism, community development, abolition of indefinite solitary confinement, anti-imperialism, prisoners’ human rights, and social equality. For more information, please go to ncttcorshu.org.