💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › brian-mccarvill-combat-dispatch-106-volunteers.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 08:02:19. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2024-06-20)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Combat Dispatch 106: Volunteers
Author: Brian McCarvill
Date: 2003
Language: en
Topics: Anarchist Black Cross, prison, Rob los Ricos
Source: Retrieved on January 1, 2005 from http://www.greenanarchist.org
Notes: from Green Anarchist #70, Autumn 2003

Brian McCarvill

Combat Dispatch 106: Volunteers

Part I

I chose the term “Volunteers” because it is apropos to combat. “Comrade”

or “comrades” is another term that I like to use a lot in conjunction

with combat. I feel as though the two terms are genuinely applicable to

Anarchists. I am an Anarchist. As an Anarchist I try to frame my

thoughts, my mode of Life, my spirit, in terms of Anarchism. My

Anarchism. My Anarchism is what I believe it to be, not what I am told

it should be. Still, my Anarchism is fluid. I constantly thirst for, and

seek out, Anarchist literature and comraderie, from anywhere and

everywhere that I can. As a prisoner in the Oregon gulag, all contact

with outside Anarchists was gradually being choked off. More on that in

a moment. Let me close this opening paragraph by stating that

“Volunteers” and “combat” extend beyond the confines of Anarchism.

“Volunteers” and “combat” encompass the struggle to move the revolution

forward. Given this very simple request, both “Volunteers” and “combat”

will tolerate and seek extra-Anarchist support.

Back to the situation within the Oregon prison system.

In 2000 the Oregon Department of Corrections (ODOC) “documented” [1]

Anarchists as a security threat group (STG). [2] At first, this STG

designation by ODOC definition earned Anarchists designation as a gang.

Prior to this secretive documenting, interaction between myself and

outside Anarchists was relatively free and open. Rejection of Anarchist

publications was rare. As far as I know, no Anarchist publication has

ever caused an actual security problem within an ODOC prison facility

that I had the pleasure of being interned in. [3] Once the documentation

occurred, almost all Anarchist literature was intercepted and rejected

by ODOC. The reasoning tendered for almost all of the rejections was the

display of the circle-A or Anarchist Black Cross symbol. It is the rare

Anarchist publication that does not contain either a circle-A symbol or

an ABC symbol. ODOC was aware of this and they wrote a provision into

their mail rule which declared the circle-A, the ABC cross, and the

black flag depictions within Anarchist publications to be “gang / STG

paraphernalia”. They followed up this declaration with a policy of “zero

tolerance for any gang / STG-related activity”. My interaction with

outside Anarchists essentially ceased to exist. I was pissed.

I was not the only one pissed off. Other Anarchist prisoners, comrades

of mine and yours, were equally pissed off. We all attempted to

challenge the rejection problem by utilising ODOC’s administrative

review process. While I was at EOCI (Eastern Oregon Correctional

Institution), every once-in-a-while one of these administrative reviews

would terminate in my favour. This did not last long before I was

transferred to OSP (Oregon State Penitentiary). At OSP, not one single

administrative review for any anarchist prisoner that I knew of

terminated in the Anarchists’ favour. [4]

We were in a quandary as to what to do about this problem. It became

obvious to me that only a court injunction was going to get us any

relief. I was loathe to file such an action. Tried pleading our case

with all of the ODOC brass who’s sphere of influence touched upon the

mail rule, or whom could influence the mail rule. It was totally

fruitless. It appeared that the lawsuit avenue was to be our only chance

of relief. It was a big chance. I was an experienced prison litigator

and prison legal assistant. I knew that the courts were not friendly to

prisoner litigation. Coupled with the bad press that Anarchists were

getting in Oregon it seemed hopeless. Still, nothing ventured, nothing

gained. We were already in a position of total repression. We could only

improve our situation. However, a loss in court would only seal our fate

in the form of our current dilemma. I filed suit, McCarvill v. DeHaan et

al., United States District Court, District of Oregon, case no.

02-1167-KI, Portland, Oregon.

The combat had begun. I do not want to bore you with the ins-and-outs of

litigating the suit. Anyone truly interested in this aspect of the

combat can access the court file and gain a pretty good idea of the

massive effort required to prosecute such a suit from the perspective of

a prisoner. [5] It was formidable, I can tell you.

We won the suit. Notice that I said “we”. I could not have accomplished

this win alone. This is the point that I wish to make. Had I been alone

in this effort I would have lost.

There was all manner of support in this combat. This is Anarchism at

work. This is revolution at work. In the matter at hand this was

victory. Of course, not all Anarchists, particularly those who pose

themselves as ethically pure Anarchists, or principled Anarchists, chose

to participate. This is certainly OK. I support them in their

principalities. They are often keepers of the flame, the ones that can

be relied upon to perpetuate both theory and history, to pacify with

knowledge and truth, noble, pertinent, and necessary tasks to be sure.

But, be that as it may, there is a war in progress, the litigation that

I started was a battle in that war, militarily speaking, an engagement.

Once started, the litigation was, in fact, approached as a battle. It

was all or nothing. This was no skirmish. As in any battle, militarily

speaking, to win against a formidable enemy, a firmly entrenched enemy,

an enemy with superior firepower that holds the high ground, the tactics

would necessitate creating multiple fronts and out-flanking the enemy on

all of those fronts. This required more than me as the litigator, much

more.

My cellmate at the time, and comrade, Rob los Ricos, came up with a plan

to mobilise outside forces. A second front was born. Rob, with myself in

full agreement, organised a campaign wherein outside supporters were

requested to protest ODOC’s repression by sending both of us postcards

with a large circle-A symbol displayed over the words “This is not a

gang symbol”. Hundreds of postcards flowed in. ODOC reacted by throwing

both of us in the hole for 120 days, convicting us of “unauthorised

organisation 1”. [6]

The hole time turned out to be a blessing in disguise as far as

litigating the lawsuit was concerned. Approximately 90% of the written

discovery efforts were conducted by me from the hole. Yes, I had to hand

print it all on unlined paper with a miniature pen the size of a

run-of-the-mill birthday cake candle, but I had plenty of time to

accomplish it all. Had I been in general population, I would not have

had the opportunity to perfect the tremendous amount of written

discovery. This proved to be a key downfall in the enemy’s defences on

the central front.

As I hammered at the enemy with the full frontal attack of the

litigation, the outside support network kicked into full mobility. The

Anarchist Prisoners Legal Aid Network, with us from the beginning, both

raising and supplying monies that supported the litigation, went on line

and otherwise organised massive publicity for the battle. APLAN also

coordinated the continued postcard campaign, as well as an effort to

arrange declarations in support of the litigation from interested

Anarchists from all over the world. [7] Break the Chains and Green

Anarchy of Eugene, Oregon, mirrored APLAN’s efforts, providing a

position statement and kicking the bushes for declarations. John Connor

and Green Anarchist of London, England, provided an in-depth position

statement. Joanne Rankin and comrades of Dublin, Ireland, held a

fundraising event and provided much appreciated moral support — thank

you, Joanne. Ryan Foote and Mishap zine of Eugene, Oregon, provided an

in-depth position statement and support that considerably freed-up ODOC

restriction on zines. John Zerzan provided much-needed declarations that

substantially took the legal substance away from ODOC’s position.

Countless others from everywhere contributed declarations, postcards

and, probably most important to me, moral support.

It turns out that, had I approached the litigation on my own, the cause

would have failed. Had ODOC been approached without the litigation, the

cause would have failed. Because we approached the battle

multilaterally, with full force and conviction, we won. Anarchist

comraderie was the binding influence. In this age of information we are

a power to be reckoned with. The isolation that accompanied Anarchist

individualism in the past is no longer a detriment. Organisation, as a

verb, not an entity, as in this instance, is a proven battle winner.

Winning the war is next. It involves combat. Fuck Uncle Sam, the

revolution needs you.

Part II

Combat begets casualties. War is hell. How true. Revolution is not a

dinner party, after all. [8] Casualties were suffered by us all around.

Impact, both immediate and long-term, varied by degrees as to the

participants. I am reminded of a conversation that I had with two of the

defendants from the lawsuit, Greg Atkin, the OSP safety officer, and

Jacy Duran, the then-central mail administrator. [9] Prior to my actual

filing of the suit I had told Duran and Atkin (to his credit, Atkin had

brought Duran to my cell door in an effort to solve the circle-A

problem) that the only avenue of relief that I had left was to actually

file suit. I asked them both if there would be any hard feelings in the

event that I did file suit and of course they both professed that there

would not be any “paybacks”.

I am currently sitting in ODOC’s showcase isolation unit prison, Two

Rivers Correctional Institution (TRCI). How and why did I arrive here?

If you have had enough wherewithal to read this far, you obviously are

able to rationalise the answer. I am getting ahead of myself here

somewhat. Let me back up.

The first casualties in the battle were absorbed by you, our supporters,

and us prison rank and file, in the form of monetary cost. Court filing

fees were $150.00. Legal copies and postage expenses quickly took off

exponentially, costing multiple hundreds of dollars all total. You

raised these funds for us. Your actions and support in doing so

constituted a state defence. Although the state complains of costs,

there is no impact upon its individuals, it simply squeezes its

taxpayers a little harder. The costs to you and I are intended to deter.

Capital at work controlling us.

For me this has never been an obstacle. For you, well, I must say,

thankfully, that those of you who were not deterred, occurred, and

hopefully will continue to occur, in adequate numbers to move the

revolution forward. To those of you who were deterred by either

financial cost, time incurred, or simply by the necessary effort, I

implore you to get the fuck out of the way, take your social-climbing

non-committal arse elsewhere — there is no place in the revolution for

you.

I recognise that outside support for us prisoners, whether it be

monetary, physical effort and/or moral support, takes away from other

valuable life experience. I think I speak for more than myself when I

say that we prisoners deeply respect and appreciate your efforts.

Economic impositions upon us, the prisoners involved (Rob los Ricos and

I here) are, of course, amplified very quickly as we deal with very

small amounts of money in our lives. We were immediately impacted when

we lost our jobs and were thrown in the hole for the postcard campaign.

As long-term prisoners, it was rather easy to take this in stride,

particularly because of the outside support that we receive. Still, the

state imposes the penalty as a deterrent, it’s all that it knows.

Personally, I lost 100 or so days of good-time as well as my prison job.

In the long run, the loss of income will become a considerable hardship

factor in my quality of life and my ability to interact with the

outside. The hole time (120 days) and the loss of good-time are somewhat

inconsequential deterrents.

The greatest casualty suffered by me is my transfer to TRCI. The state

knows this, it is why they did it. There was a clamour from the outside

and from me to ODOC high-rankers to restore Rob and I as cellies and to

our jobs. Even the attorney general’s office recommended return of the

jobs and no transfers. But authority must have its pound of flesh,

gained in this case through the mental anguish inflicted upon me through

the transfer to TRCI. Not only did they knowingly separate Rob and I,

the worst thing they could do to me, they transferred me to the only

prison in Oregon that has no means of ever sitting with back support.

They did this with the full knowledge that I suffer from severe spinal

trauma and wedged discs. So they know they are torturing me mentally and

physically. Still, separating Rob and I was and is a tremendous blow to

my good mental health. We pose absolutely no threat to ODOC of any kind.

Filing of the lawsuit, your support, the engagement, was an affront to

ODOC security’s fascist ego, nothing more, nothing less. They simply

cannot stomach that they were wrong, both morally and legally.

Authority, like a trod-upon viper must bite and bite it has.

Conclusion

I am currently in physical and mental agony as I write this piece.

Perhaps by the time it is read conditions will have improved. I know

that comrades at APLAN have put out a call for a write-in campaign to

ODOC officials on my behalf. Asking that I be returned to OSP and be

given adequate medical treatment via indy-media on the Net. Regardless,

I’m a casualty of war, of combat, a willing casualty. We must not be

daunted by authority, by capital, or by combat. It has been said that

history is written by the winner. My friends, we should have and

maintain every intent to write that history.

 

[1] This is ODOC’s terminology. Webster describes a document as: “A

paper that furnishes information, proof, or support of something else”.

[2] This according to a sworn statement by Benny Ward, ODOC’s STG

manager.

[3] Eastern Oregon Correctional Institution at Pendleton, Oregon, and

the Oregon State Penitentiary at Salem, Oregon. My interaction with

outside Anarchists earned me my transfer from EOCI to OSP for

“administrative security concerns”.

[4] At least not until the date this dispatch was written.

[5] The court file will show you documentation actually filed. It will

not show you the tremendous amount of written discovery that took place

in the form of Requests for Production and Requests for Admissions

submitted to each of the ten separate defendants. This was a brutal,

voluminous task, but proved to be exceptionally effective. The court

file should be accessible online for anyone wishing to view the

documents filed.

[6] Of course we first had a fair trial!

[7] Declarations are sworn statements on par with affidavits. Federal

courts allow declarations. Declarations do not require the declarant to

swear before a notary public. The court accepts the declarant’s

statement as true as a matter of independent honour.

[8] Please forgive my quoting of Mao but many of his observations are

fairly astute on removal from the ideology.

[9] Duran proved to be extremely vindictive. She rose to her position of

ODOC authority via a stint as a line officer and an Internal Affairs

officer. Since the prosecution of this action, she has been supplanted

as head Central Mail Administrator by Randy Geer. Duran’s vindictiveness

was instrumental in the backlash against this author.