Ruth Wilson Gilmore: Don’t Reform Prisons, Abolish Them
From the Critical Resistance website:
What is the PIC? What is Abolition?
THE PRISON INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX
The prison industrial complex (PIC) is a term we use to describe the overlapping interests of government and industry that use surveillance, policing, and imprisonment as solutions to economic, social and political problems.
Through its reach and impact, the PIC helps and maintains the authority of people who get their power through racial, economic and other privileges. There are many ways this power is collected and maintained through the PIC, including creating mass media images that keep alive stereotypes of people of color, poor people, queer people, immigrants, youth, and other oppressed communities as criminal, delinquent, or deviant. This power is also maintained by earning huge profits for private companies that deal with prisons and police forces; helping earn political gains for “tough on crime” politicians; increasing the influence of prison guard and police unions; and eliminating social and political dissent by oppressed communities that make demands for self-determination and reorganization of power in the US.
ABOLITION
PIC abolition is a political vision with the goal of eliminating imprisonment, policing, and surveillance and creating lasting alternatives to punishment and imprisonment.
From where we are now, sometimes we can’t really imagine what abolition is going to look like. Abolition isn’t just about getting rid of buildings full of cages. It’s also about undoing the society we live in because the PIC both feeds on and maintains oppression and inequalities through punishment, violence, and controls millions of people. Because the PIC is not an isolated system, abolition is a broad strategy. An abolitionist vision means that we must build models today that can represent how we want to live in the future. It means developing practical strategies for taking small steps that move us toward making our dreams real and that lead us all to believe that things really could be different. It means living this vision in our daily lives.
Abolition is both a practical organizing tool and a long-term goal.
Building solidarity and connections between Green locals and grassroots organizations like
Critical Resistance constructs Green Party Power!
If you have an affiliate of Critical Resistance in your state or city, reach out to them and see what potential convergences exist between the respective memberships. See how and why your organizations can expand outreach and base building activities in a mutually-beneficial fashion.
Download the Green Party Power Reader for Free Today!
The guns at Sumter [that began the American Civil War], the marching armies, the fugitive slaves, the fugitives as “contrabands,” spies, servants and laborers; the Negro as soldier, as citizen, as voter—these steps came from 1861 to 1868 with regular beat that was almost rhythmic. It was the price of the disaster of war, and it was a price that few Americans at first dreamed of paying or wanted to pay. The North was not Abolitionist. It was overwhelmingly in favor of Negro slavery, so long as this did not interfere with Northern moneymaking. But, on the other hand, there was a minority of the North who hated slavery with perfect hatred; who wanted no union with slaveholders; who fought for freedom and treated Negroes as men. As the Abolition-democracy gained in prestige and in power, they appeared as prophets, and led by statesmen, they began to guide the nation out of the morass into which it had fallen. They and their black friends and the new freedmen became gradually the leaders of a Reconstruction of Democracy in the United States, while marching millions sang the noblest war-song of the ages to the tune of “John Brown’s Body”:
Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord/He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored/He hath loosed the fateful lightning of his terrible swift sword/His Truth is marching on! -W.E.B. Du BoisWe…see the Negroes as foremost among those who will struggle against the crimes and barbarities of the capitalist system. The reason for this lies in the very nature of the Negro’s position in capitalist society. The most exploited, the most oppressed, the most discriminated against, Negroes are the ones who experience most acutely and most unbearably the overwhelming burdens which capitalism places upon the masses in every country. Negroes haven’t to read in books about the fraud of capitalist democracy. Karl Marx and Lenin have little to teach them about the fact.This conception of the role of the Negro has hitherto been obscured by the racial prejudices instilled into the different sections of the working class by American capitalism. The revolutionary party therefore is faced with the tremendous difficulty of overcoming this division. Yet difficult as this task is, it is a difficulty of tactics and not of strategy. The important question is not so much that of winning the Negroes for the revolution, but of instilling the Negro masses with the conviction that they can place their trust and confidence in a revolutionary party composed largely of white workers, as is inevitable in American society. -C.L.R. James
Why We Need a Reader
In any moment of heightened political contradictions, it proves necessary to develop a firm set of ideological coordinates from which praxis can materialize. This is particularly true in the matter of trying to build a mass-membership organization that goes outside the confines of the petit bourgeoisie and into the grassroots where the working class is to be found simultaneous with the growing alarmism around reborn fascist politics.
Table of Contents
-
Are Prisons Obsolete? by Angela Y. Davis
-
The Communalist Project by Murray Bookchin
-
Social Ecology versus Deep Ecology: A Challenge for the Ecology Movement by Murray Bookchin
-
Ecofascism: Lessons from the German Experience by Peter Staudenmaier and Janet Biehl
-
The Bernie Sanders Paradox by Murray Bookchin
Click Here to Download a
.ZIP Archive of the Reader in Multiple Formats!
We currently are seeing in the mainstream and even psuedo-progressive left media a large-scale meta-narrative that promotes a definite and clear political agenda. With these contradictions creating such serious and confusing times, it is important for Greens to move outside the realm of petty electoralism and into the street. The Green Party can become a mass-membership movement that opposes imperialism, settler-colonist white supremacy, misogyny (including when it appears as corporate neoliberal feminism), and austerity while defending the commons.
These readings are not programmatic or agenda-based.
Such times require something much bolder.
We open this reader with an analysis of mass incarceration and the prison-industrial complex by Angela Davis. This is the human rights issue of our epoch and It must be understood as a central location of struggle. It is impossible to subsume the matter under the heading of simplistic ecology or relegate it to a lower position on a roster of priorities. Rather, it is the true liberation politics of genuine socialism that can inform the struggle for livable ecology.
Murray Bookchin’s The Communalist Project is a vision of a Green future that goes well beyond Keynesian welfare state politics and into the realm of actual political democracy. He writes:
Communalism seeks to recapture the meaning of politics in its broadest, most emancipatory sense, indeed, to fulfill the historic potential of the municipality as the developmental arena of mind and discourse. It conceptualizes the municipality, potentially at least, as a transformative development beyond organic evolution into the domain of social evolution.
The city is the domain where the archaic blood-tie that was once limited to the unification of families and tribes, to the exclusion of outsiders, was – juridically, at least – dissolved. It became the domain where hierarchies based on parochial and sociobiological attributes of kinship, gender, and age could be eliminated and replaced by a free society based on a shared common humanity.
Potentially, it remains the domain where the once-feared stranger can be fully absorbed into the community – initially as a protected resident of a common territory and eventually as a citizen, engaged in making policy decisions in the public arena. It is above all the domain where institutions and values have their roots not in zoology but in civil human activity.
This is how Greens can show that another world is possible, one where every cook can govern.
From here, we include two further writings on the topic of fascism. For too long, Greens have been rebuked, sometimes rightfully so, for refusing to acknowledge their privilege and role within white supremacy. Many suburban Greens have awful politics on race, gender, sexuality, and the role of the welfare state in the lives of the working class. Participation in the Green Party is seen as a petit bourgeois hobby that fails to acknowledge the needs and wants of the working class, a kind of meek protest politics for white people who wish to ‘Green Keynes’ and little more.
However, it is from within the earliest writings of American Greens like Janet Biehl, Peter Staudenmaier, and Bookchin that we find a tradition of ecological anti-fascism that can provide useful praxis moving forward. These writings go beyond the realm of spontaneity and demonstrations to provide an ideological rebuke to a fascist current Americans can expect to see more and more of in the coming years. While Donald Trump may be a passing political actor, the politics he has tapped into will be with us for a long time and will require action that goes well beyond the consensus of even a retro New Dealer like Bernie Sanders.
It is our hope that this strand of the Green tradition, a socialist praxis rooted in values of liberté, égalité, fraternité and harkening back to the emancipatory ideals of the Haitian Revolution, might take root in our wider American Green Party and help build our base into a viable force for taking power.
Hawkins: Democracy is not possible under capitalism
In 2016, Greens unanimously declared the party an ecosocialist party, and Howie Hawkins is discussing this promise and how democracy cannot truly play out under capitalism (click play on the audio feed at the end of this post).
The Green Party platform on economic justice reads:
The Green Party seeks to build an alternative economic system based on ecology and decentralization of power, an alternative that rejects both the capitalist system that maintains private ownership over almost all production as well as the state-socialist system that assumes control over industries without democratic, local decision making. We believe the old models of capitalism (private ownership of production) and state socialism (state ownership of production) are not ecologically sound, socially just, or democratic and that both contain built-in structures that advance injustices.
Instead we will build an economy based on large-scale green public works, municipalization, and workplace and community democracy. Some call this decentralized system ‘ecological socialism,’ ‘communalism,’ or the ‘cooperative commonwealth,’ but whatever the terminology, we believe it will help end labor exploitation, environmental exploitation, and racial, gender, and wealth inequality and bring about economic and social justice due to the positive effects of democratic decision making.
Production is best for people and planet when democratically owned and operated by those who do the work and those most affected by production decisions. This model of worker and community empowerment will ensure that decisions that greatly affect our lives are made in the interests of our communities, not at the whim of centralized power structures of state administrators or of capitalist CEOs and distant boards of directors. Small, democratically run enterprises, when embedded in and accountable to our communities, will make more ecologically sound decisions in materials sourcing, waste disposal, recycling, reuse, and more. Democratic, diverse ownership of production would decentralize power in the workplace, which would in turn decentralize economic power more broadly.
See http://www.gp.org/economic_justice_and_sustainability_2016
Texas GP members call for strong anti-racist stance from party leaders
By now, many people are familiar with the situation in San Antonio over the weekend preceding July 4th, in which a local activist threw a drink into the face of a young person that was joking out loud about lynching Black people, while in a public establishment. It was initially assumed that the local activist was a member of the Green Party, which later fact-checking showed was inaccurate. Since then, there has been a short statement issued by the Green Party of Texas, which some Texas Greens find to be lacking. The sequence of events, plus a way to get involved, are posted here.
The original statement issued by GPTX was:
Our official reply concerning Kino Jimemez: Kino Jiménez has no association with the Green Party of Texas other than an entry in our contact file which was bogus and therefore has been deleted. His actions are 180º opposite of what we stand for.
Source: http://www.facebook.com/txgreens/posts/1990108787675483
Some GPTX members feel that the short statement centers white supremacy by concerning itself only with the actions of the San Antonio activist and also offers one take on the concept of non-violence. Therefore, a group of Texas Greens decided to write an updated statement, here and offer commentary on the situation. Here is that first draft:
On July 4th, Kino Ahuitzotl Jiménez removed a MAGA hat from a teen sitting in a Whataburger and then splashed him with an open drink. On July 5th, a Heavy article was published which claimed Jiménez was a Green Party member and quoted the secretary of Harris County Green Party as having expelled him due to his actions. On July 6th, the GPTX steering committee posted a summary of these events, concluding that Jiménez’s behavior was “180º opposite of what we stand for.” Subsequently, Jiménez has not only been verbally assaulted around the nation due to both liberal and conservative media coverage, but was arrested, and lost employment at a bar in San Antonio.
After a period of democratic deliberation amongst the rank-and-file of the GPTX, many of us have concluded that the official response was inadequate, and worse, contributes to the very institutionalization of white supremacy against which this party is opposed. On behalf of the GPTX, we apologize for fundamentally mishandling this incident. On the one hand we attempted to resolve the situation by shifting blame to bureaucratic problems, and on the other we actively condemned the anti-racist actions of Jiménez out of a liberal interpretation of ‘non-violence.’
Although the secretary of Harris County Green Party had no authority under our bylaws to speak to the media on behalf of the party as a whole, nor to expel Jiménez, we collectively hold responsibility for inadequately training our officers in their powers and responsibilities. Additionally, we should generally be more prepared to handle and correct such incidences, should they occur.
In terms of the actual actions of Jiménez, both the secretary of Harris County Green Party and the SEC offered a single interpretation of our Ten Key Values, one which not only failed to fit the fact patterns, but also provided tacit cover for white supremacy. Jiménez was responding not only to the MAGA hat, which is itself a white supremacist symbol, but also to the horrifying and racist dialogue of the two teens. In this sense, Jiménez was acting to simultaneously disrupt the ‘safe space’ that enabled the racist banter and to put ice on the teens’ expectations that such ideas are acceptable in our society. In contrast, by denying Jiménez the agency to engage in such low-level disruptions as splashing a drink on racists or grabbing a hate symbol, our leadership has functionally taken the stance that people of color can only protest within boundaries of ‘civility,’ which of course are pre-determined by white society.
While our leadership may have cited the Ten Key Values, they surely stopped at the title of “Non-Violence,” for under the description of that value, our party has previously affirmed that “We recognize the need for self-defense and the defense of others who are in danger.” Further, another key value, Social Justice and Equal Opportunity states that, “We must consciously confront in ourselves, our organizations, and society at large, any discrimination…”
What better way to protect people of color as a whole and to confront discrimination than to verbally and physically disrupt racism as it happens? To look at it differently, does Jiménez deserve to be jailed and unemployed because he took away a racist symbol and splashed a drink at teens laughing about lynchings? Based on our reading of social justice theory and our own platform, of course not; to conclude otherwise is tacit white supremacy, plain and simple.
Thus, we believe that the Green Party of Texas as a whole owes an apology to Jiménez and all people of color, both within and without the party. Although we had believed ourselves to be an ally in the fight against white supremacy, our actions in this incident have clearly revealed otherwise. We are deeply sorry for having failed here as anti-racist allies.
Nonetheless, an apology is not enough. We will also continue to engage in democratic dialogue with the goal of producing changes in internal policy and officer education, which should hopefully prevent such failures from occurring in the future.
Co-signers:Aaron Renaud (Dallas County, TX)
Alex Telecky (Collin County, TX)
Cory Bowers (Dallas County, TX)
Remington Alessi (Galveston County, TX)
Adrian Boutoureira (Travis County, TX)
Natalia Schuurman (Travis County, TX)
Travis Christal (Tarrant County, TX)
The draft co-signers explain:
On Sunday (7/15), the GPTX SEC discussed a proposal by several TX Young Greens for the party to publicly apologize for its mishandling of the recent incident concerning Mr. Jiménez. The proposed apology is included below. The TX GP leadership decided to form an ad hoc committee to write up an apology by the night of the 17th, which may or may not reflect the original proposal. This committee was comprised of Shawn Gay, Jeff Justice, Alán Alán Apurim, Kevin McCormick, Alexandra Telecky, and Aaron Renaud, but also received commentary from GPTX co-chairs Joy Davis and Wesson Gaige.
The editing process was a struggle, as the liberals on the committee wished to defang and weaken the language of the apology draft, such as by eliminating the voice and rhythm from the writing, down-playing the failures of GPTX leadership by eliminating such language, and reducing space given to the leftist counter-interpretation of the ten key values. For example, both Shawn and Jeff originally wished to eliminate everything after the opening paragraph in order to replace it with the following: “After further discussion with our party membership, we would like to formally retract stating that Jimenez’s actions are 180 degrees opposite of what we stand for. We believe that he should not have been arrested or fired from his job. The reason why is that Jimenez was, in his own way, standing up against what he viewed as racist behavior, which some in society believe is acceptable. We find such behavior completely unacceptable. The MAGA hat has regretfully become a provocative symbol of racist ideals and policies. The Green Party of Texas stands for non-violence and promoting social justice and equal opportunity. It vows to continue and redouble our advocacy for all who have suffered and still suffer the effects of institutionalized white supremacy.” Similarly, Kevin McCormick stated that this apology, “…is shaping up to be worse than the original blunders of the HCGP Secretary and subsequent blunder of the SEC co-chair,” that “‘we’ are not collectively guilty of these actions,” and the letter “looks like emotive babble.”
On July 19th, two days past the stated deadline, the ad hoc committee submitted a heavily edited apology to the SEC, with a vote scheduled for July 23nd, or six days past the stated deadline. As of the 23rd, co-chair Wes Gaige claimed that the ad hoc committee was submitting the final copy to the SEC later that day, with revisions occurring on Slack, outside of the original committee deliberation in email which ended on the 19th. In truth, some committee members were engaged in a parallel editing conversation outside of the ad-hoc committee’s email thread, with Jeff Justice making calls for “completely redoing this document.” As a result, non-committee members have essentially rewritten the entire apology from the ground up, with Wesson Gaige pushing to submit that copy to the SEC for a vote, instead of the copy deliberated on in the email thread.
The new apology reads: “The Green Party of Texas supports Non-Violence as one of its Ten Key Values. Self defense is the right of all human beings subject to attack. Given the option, walking away from a potentially violent situation is the better response. The incident shown in the mass media, the throwing of a drink and walking away with a hat, may have been the result of aggressive provocation by the people taping Kino Jimenez. We don’t know what was happening prior to his being videotaped. Green Party value of non-violence would promote intervening verbally or by providing a comfortable space to argue without touching another person or throwing objects when confronted with bullying and verbal or physical aggression. We abhor violence. We also abhor racism and discrimination. We also recognize that resistance to injustice may require measures of civil disobedience and verbal and physical manifestation of disapproval. The matter is wisely employing those measures, including what, when, and how. Please note that the Green Party of Texas hasn’t banned Kino Jimenez from anything. He was never a member of the Green Party to begin with. We stand opposed to the trend towards fascism led by the current President and his racist supporters. We stand in support of people oppressed by white supremacy.”
Thus the liberals of the party advocated a distortion of our party process by subverting the ad-hoc committee entirely. For example, Shawn Gay claimed on the 22nd that “the SEC will vote later today before posting on FB,” but without clarifying at all that the entire apology had been completely rewritten. When these failures to abide by process were brought up to the GPTX leadership, their only response was “Such was not communicated to the rest of us. We were looking for the draft and nothing happened. In the meantime, Alfred submitted his draft.” Although both co-chairs were cc’d on the email thread and had access to the Google doc containing the official draft, they would rather overlook an apology that runs counter to their liberal ideology and ignore the process entirely.
As a result, the following co-signers have created this petition urging the GPTX SEC to adopt the apology as it was originally written (first quote above) and without further bureaucratic delay.
Take Action
The petition below sends an email to the GPTX leadership to appeal for them to make a courageous statement about both the human right to self-defense and the responsibility of all Greens to opposed openly white supremacist and racist speech and actions.
Petition: Ideological Struggle in Texas over anti-racist action
| 16 | Mx. Jeff R. | Gulfport, FL 33707, FL | Aug 04, 2018 | |
| 15 | Miss Ariel H. | Alvin, TX | Jul 28, 2018 | |
| 14 | Miss Abigail P. | Toledo, Ohio | Jul 27, 2018 | |
| 13 | Mx. Tommie J. | Charlotte , North Carolina | Jul 26, 2018 | |
| 12 | Ms Stephanie T. | San Antonio , TX | Jul 25, 2018 | |
| 11 | Mr Ryan G. | Little Rock, AR | Jul 24, 2018 | |
| 10 | Ms Christiane D. | Spokane, WA | Jul 24, 2018 | |
| 9 | Ms matthew l. | galveston, tx | Jul 24, 2018 | |
| 8 | Mr Ahmed E. | Union, NJ | Jul 24, 2018 | |
| 7 | Ms Natalia S. | Austin, TX | Jul 24, 2018 | |
| 6 | Ms Olinka G. | Dallas, Texas | Jul 24, 2018 | |
| 5 | Ms Megan B. | Clovis, CA | Jul 24, 2018 | |
| 4 | Mr Tron C. | Jul 24, 2018 | ||
| 3 | Mx. Jason J. | Denver , Colorado | Jul 24, 2018 | |
| 2 | Mr Jacob F. | Colorado Springs, Colorado | Jul 24, 2018 | |
| 1 | Mx. Remington A. | Galveston, TX | Jul 23, 2018 |
Why Green Party politics must explicitly oppose white supremacy
In the 2000’s, the environmental movement faced an internal crisis. In some quarters, it had failed to maintain an explicit and open opposition to white supremacy, sex/gender/orientation oppression, and other forms of bigotry. As a result, the notorious white supremacist publisher and activist John Tanton infiltrated and co-opted the vocabulary and platform of struggle for livable ecology so to promote his own noxious brand of hatred towards our Latinx brothers and sisters. This video from the period detailed the matter (please note any shortcomings of its analysis should be acknowledged in part to its age as a documentary from a specific time period).
Tanton was not an aberration or one-off. Indeed, the Green movement in other countries has also encountered this.
In Germany, where the Green Party political movement originated in the 1970s, neo-Nazis began to enter the party in the 1980s, a matter documented and analyzed for American audiences by Janet Biehl and Peter Staudenmaier in their 1992 volume Ecofascism: Lessons from the German Experience.
That challenge has remained on the periphery of environmentalist politics for decades. This is because there is a convergence of values between the Green philosophy in some quarters and Fascism as a historical socio-political project. The German philosopher Martin Heidegger is considered one of the most influential thinkers of the twentieth century and his Being and Time is ranked one of the most important philosophical texts in the Continental tradition. His high esteem for the natural world and rebuke of modern industrial society in the name of the natural, bucolic landscape does anticipate many of the themes that emerged when the environmental movement began to form in the 1960s and ’70s. However, Heidegger was also a convert to the Nazi Party and its high estimation of “blood and soil”, a development that scandalized his pupils and caused Hannah Arendt to break with her old professor and mentor.
The late Murray Bookchin saw the shadow of Heidegger within the coordinates of Deep Ecology, a philosophy that vied with his Social Ecology project for the ideological heart and soul of the environmental movement. He wrote in 1987
Deep ecology has parachuted into our midst quite recently from the Sunbelt’s bizarre mix of Hollywood and Disneyland, spiced with homilies from Taoism, Buddhism, spiritualism, reborn Christianity, and in some cases eco-fascism, while social ecology draws its inspiration from such outstanding radical decentralist thinkers as Peter Kropotkin, William Morris, and Paul Goodman, among many others who have advanced a serious challenge to the present society with its vast hierarchical, sexist, class-ruled, statist apparatus and militaristic history.
Let us face these differences bluntly: deep ecology, despite all its social rhetoric, has virtually no real sense that our ecological problems have their ultimate roots in society and in social problems. It preaches a gospel of a kind of “original sin” that accurses a vague species called humanity — as though people of color were equatable with whites, women with men, the Third World with the First, the poor with the rich, and the exploited with their exploiters. Deep ecologists see this vague and undifferentiated humanity essentially as an ugly “anthropocentric” thing…that is “overpopulating” the planet, “devouring” its resources, and destroying its wildlife and the biosphere… Deep ecology, formulated largely by privileged male white academics, has managed to bring sincere naturalists like Paul Shepard into the same company as patently antihumanist and macho mountain men like David Foreman of Earth First! who preach a gospel that humanity is some kind of cancer in the world of life.
It was out of this kind of crude eco-brutalism that Hitler, in the name of “population control,” with a racial orientation, fashioned theories of blood and soil that led to the transport of millions of people to murder camps like Auschwitz. The same eco-brutalism now reappears a half-century later among self-professed deep ecologists who believe that Third World peoples should be permitted to starve to death and that desperate Indian immigrants from Latin America should be exclude by the border cops from the United States lest they burden “our” ecological resources.
It is for these reasons that a Green Party local must explicitly and intentionally from the outset state its opposition to white supremacy, xenophobia, sex/gender/orientation oppression, and other forms of bigotry that can and do emerge among American voters. If we honestly desire to see the Green Party of the United States become a mass membership party of working class people, it must embrace a class-based intersectional feminism whose foundational coordinates are based in internal and external anti-oppression struggle. It must oppose bigotry both in our wider communities and amongst its own membership so to create the Beloved Community that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. promoted in his philosophy.
The great W.E.B. Du Bois proposed this explanation for the logic of white supremacy in his classic Black Reconstruction in America:
Most persons do not realize how far [building Black-white unity] failed to work in the South, and it failed to work because the theory of race was supplemented by a carefully planned and slowly evolved method, which drove such a wedge between the white and black workers that there probably are not today in the world two groups of workers with practically identical interests who hate and fear each other so deeply and persistently and who are kept so far apart that neither sees anything of common interest.
It must be remembered that the white group of laborers, while they received a low wage, were compensated in part by a sort of public and psychological wage. They were given public deference and titles of courtesy because they were white. They were admitted freely with all classes of white people to public functions, public parks, and the best schools. The police were drawn from their ranks, and the courts, dependent on their votes, treated them with such leniency as to encourage lawlessness. Their vote selected public officials, and while this had small effect upon the economic situation, it had great effect upon their personal treatment and the deference shown them. White schoolhouses were the best in the community, and conspicuously placed, and they cost anywhere from twice to ten times as much per capita as the colored schools. The newspapers specialized on news that flattered the poor whites and almost utterly ignored the Negro except in crime and ridicule.
Here is an interview taken from Black Agenda Radio featuring Jeffrey B. Perry, an independent activist/scholar whose work focuses upon fighting white supremacy within the ranks of workers in America by promoting the study of Hubert Harrison and Theodore W. Allen. “This is a white supremacist capitalist country. White supremacy has been central to how the ruling class has maintained control since the 17th century.”
The preceding views expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily imply explicitly or implicitly those of the wider Green Party Power Project membership.