Mourn for Victims, Not Abusers!

On the afternoon of Thursday, April 6, the Travis County Sheriff’s Department went to the home of Professor Richard Morrisett as part of a welfare check requested by the University of Texas after Morrisett did not appear for a scheduled appointment. Cops entered his home and found Morrisett deceased, and though they are still awaiting an official cause of death from the Medical Examiner’s Office, any suspicious activity or foul play has been ruled out. This being the case, we cannot speculate as to the cause of Morrisett’s death or details surrounding it. Whether he experienced a stress-induced heart attack brought on by the months of pressure from students, carried out a guilt-driven suicide pushed forward by the public exposure of his violent, anti-women crimes, or simply had a karmic accident, it does not make a difference in our ability to draw out many lessons learned over the course of the past months.

First, it must be said that we do not shed any tears for dead abusers. In contrast to the statement given by UT President Greg Fenves, the death of Morrisett is not a tragedy by any means. The world is better off, if only marginally, for having one less abusive, dangerous man breathing in it. His death means there is one less person who presents an active threat to the women surrounding him. The real tragedy to be considered is the thousands of women and victims who are strangled, beaten, raped, and killed by men like Morrisett. The real tragedy is the thousands of women and victims who are forced to the point of suicide because of the psychological torture they are made to suffer through in the wake of this violence and abuse.

Official statement from President Fenves regarding the death of Professor Morrisett

It is not only tragic, but despicable and infuriating that representatives like Fenves in the UT administration who claim to work in the interest of accountability and the safety of women and students will not only refuse to carry out just measures against abusers like Morrisett, but mourn their death as a tragedy! It is revolting that Fenves, the same person who called the results of the report on sexual assault at UT a “wake-up call” and said that “every individual who serves our university must feel valued, respected, and free to learn and work in a safe environment” is the very person harboring and mourning the violent men who make that environment actively dangerous. When we read his crocodile tears, hypocritically claiming, “The first injustice committed in every assault or inappropriate behavior is the act itself, but the second injustice is often the silence of the community surrounding that victim,” it’s hard to find the reaction of Fenves and the UT administration anything in this case anything but ironic! If silence in the face of assault is injustice, then pray tell, Fenves, what are we to label your administration not only remaining silent, but being actively complicit? Nothing less than criminal! Criminals deserve justice. Just as the justice was beginning to tighten its grip around Morrisett’s throat, so too will the masses of oppressed and abused victims of patriarchal violence soon cast their judgment upon the University, shattering its walls and bringing those like Fenves and his fellow bureaucrats in front of the people to stand trial.

At the same time, death is not justice. We do not follow the radical feminist line that claims every abuser should die; we follow a proletarian feminist line that works for the destruction of the economic, political, and cultural basis for the reproduction of patriarchal violence. We do not see men and women as two classes irreconcilably pitted against one another; we see that capitalist patriarchy benefits men overall not as a whole group, but both men and women of the ruling class. That is to say that the vast majority of men in the world, in reality, have more to win from the destruction of patriarchy and the class system that creates and maintains it than they do from upholding it. Our struggle, then, is for the unification of men and women along proletarian feminist lines for the establishment of working class political power, power that can enable us to subject men with deeply-ingrained patriarchal values to total reformation and reeducation. Since we believe that people are first and foremost products of their social conditions, and because social conditions are always bound to change, we understand that it only becomes possible to transform patriarchal men into men who fight for the proletarian feminist cause in the context of a revolutionary proletarian feminist movement.Bringing men to justice and towards eventual transformation in this way is not a painless or simple process – it is a long and hard fight against the deeply-rooted ideas of the ruling class that are within them. The tools we use in this fight, especially when we are fighting a capitalist class who is still in power and do not have revolutionary power established at any significant level, cannot be ones of merely criticism, reeducation, and reformation. Our tools in these conditions (as well as those in stages of revolutionary power) also consist of things like public exposure, embarrassment, and harassment, as well as confrontation and physical violence. Bringing men face to face with the gravity of their crimes is crucial in bringing them to understand the necessity for their personal transformation, and these are all tools which should be made use of. Though he may have chosen to go to the grave before repenting for his crimes, the transformation of someone like Morrisett from someone who committed anti-women crimes into someone who will wholly fight for the feminist cause is, for us, what constitutes the true meaning of justice. This justice cannot be carried out without a fighting feminist movement that is willing to confront men like Morrisett and force them to come to an understanding of their behaviors.

What we have seen over the past years, demonstrated clearly by the case of Morrisett, is that the administration of the University of Texas is completely unwilling to take responsibility for protecting students from not only other abusive students, but the abusive professors who hold a position over these students as well. We knew from the beginning that it was a fool’s errand to ask UT to fire the very man that they harbored and defended for half a year. With the death of Morrisett, it would seem that the administration has now been absolved of taking any responsibility in doing what was the right thing from the beginning regardless. Morrisett was found dead the very same day that the institutional policy changes made as a result of the investigation into the University policies that had allowed him to remain employed at UT were released. In looking at the actual substance of the policy changes contained within the report, which was the one small measure Fenves was determined to make in January in response to Morrisett’s case, it is clear that these changes mean little to nothing in reality. In any case, they would certainly not be applied retroactively to hold Morrisett accountable and subject him to any disciplinary measures, much less firing. The only notable difference made within the changed policy broadens UT’s ability to discipline employees if their off-campus behavior does not reflect the “Mission, Core Values, and Code of Conduct” of the University.

Despite the clear truth that UT does not operate on the basis of values beyond profits, it is laughable that in the 137 years of its existence, it has never once before now been forced to bring its employee’s conduct outside of campus under the scrutiny of its overall institutional “values”. As long as an employee’s actions outside of campus don’t impact the employee’s ability to fulfill their job requirements or affect the immediate safety of students, then all is well! But since strangling, stalking, and assaulting a woman like Morrisett did clearly doesn’t entail being a threat to the safety of students, we know that only the first criteria truly matters to UT. Above all other values lies the ability to work, and thus make profit for the university, especially when it comes to researchers who earn UT substantial grant money like Morrisett. The application of the standard that students should also unwaveringly uphold the University’s values has already been well-established, with several student athletes expelled and barred from campus for sexual assault and physical assault charges against women. In analyzing the 2017-2018 revenue sources for UT, it’s vital to note that 47% of the school’s funding comes from research grants, while only 21% of its funding comes from students’ tuition payments. So why do abuser professor get protections that students don’t? Because he brings in buckets of money for the University! The fact that UT is an institution not for some abstract “public good”, but to secure profits for the capitalist class becomes only more apparent as time goes on. It’s only in times of PR crises like this that UT is forced to enact small formal measures to maintain this facade.


We don’t see a “small victory” in these policy changes, we see this act for what it is: an illusion and nothing more! What does an increasingly broad set of disciplinary measures even amount to when the existing measures weren’t ever enforced? Morrisett went months without reporting his arrest and conviction in this case, breaking the existing policies of UT at the time and he was let off without any sanctions whatsoever. The empty policies and values of UT mean nothing to the students because they clearly mean nothing to the University, who is fully accountable for harboring and protecting Morrisett (with dedicated security after his building was targeted). And true to their vile nature, they continue to staff others like rapist Robert Reece and will likely pull out the same measures to defend him when the students decide to strike out.

In bourgeois societies like the one that is forced upon us, accountability is allowed to be decided upon and kept within the confines of the ruling class’ own institutions. The police police themselves, the government investigates itself, and the University does the same, all while conjuring up bullshit reasons for the lack of real justice or accountability. In the growing movement of the working class whose fight is intensifying and growing more massive and militant daily, accountability comes from the masses of people themselves. These two forms of accountability are fundamentally opposed to one another because they represent mutually exclusive interests – the power of the few capitalists in control currently versus the power of the numerous proletarians and allied people. The burgeoning strength of the latter, which the campaign against Morrisett saw in levels unprecedented at UT for years and which must press onward to new heights, spells nothing less than pure terror for the ruling class. True justice and real accountability will only be achieved through a mobilization of the people against the injustices carried out by the ruling classes and their institutions like the universities. We know that in this system, there is no end to the exploitation and oppressive conditions faced by the people. The death of one abuser is followed by the creation of more. Richard Morrisett is replaced by Robert Reece. The only solution to resolving this seemingly-endless pattern is through organizing the masses of oppressed people to carry out a massive society-wide upheaval and militant destruction of the existing order which does not serve, but exploits them. In a word, it requires revolution. Revolution which accomplishes the full mobilization of working women is the only means by which to achieve a society free from abuse, where the social conditions which create patriarchal ideas are no longer able to exist. Getting to this point means being uncompromising and unhesitant in our understanding of the type of tactics and organizing that will actually be able to arm the people for the fight against the capitalist class, who already carries out a war against us daily. We believe this campaign has, if nothing else, proven these methods to be the only means by which we can organize the people into a resolute fighting force capable of tearing down the walls of the University’s ivory tower.

Since the news of Morrisett’s violent criminal convictions was exposed by local news in late January, we have been campaigning for his removal from UT, a goal we aimed to reach not by convincing the same administration who protected him into a sudden change of heart, but by creating conditions on campus and in Morrisett’s personal life that would have made it more favorable for him to leave UT rather than stay. There has been significant media coverage of our campaign against Morrisett as well as multiple anonymous actions taken against him, with liberal journalists ranging from students supporting these efforts to fascist sympathizers who now say the student body is to blame for this abuser’s death. Because of the shock his death brought, we suspect some may speculate whether the militant tactics used against Morrisett were an appropriate response to his abuse and his continued employment at UT. We disagree with this sentiment fully. The actions taken against him and the complicit University demonstrated the will and power the student body that can only develop to a higher level in the coming times. They were a necessary response to the absolute failure of the University to dole out any sort of punishment against Morrisett after the administration discovered he failed to report his assault arrest and convictions. The actions were certainly a necessary response to the investigation findings which said Morrisett did not pose a threat to campus, despite President Fenves previously admitting he does not know the full scope of abuse on campus, and despite the high prevalence of professors across the country abusing their positions of power to manipulate young women. Considering all this, we believe we had an obligation to post Morrisett’s face and information about his crimes around campus to warn students of this potential, unrestrained threat. These posters were promptly removed by UT staff from poles and walls both on and off campus, despite UTPD stating to media that none of the content on the posters was actually illegal. We were not deterred by this and instead organized a rally outside of the School of Pharmacy to protest Morrisett’s continued employment. The University struck back again, sending over a half dozen UTPD cops into the crowd to arrest a woman who was attending and charging her with criminal trespass, despite the fact that she has never received a verbal or written ban from campus with or without a specified timeline for the ban. It was clear the administration and its lackeys were doing all they could to repress the fight against this admitted domestic abuser, at the cost of the well-being and freedom of women, students, and the community surrounding UT.

Before and after our protest, multiple anonymous acts of vandalism against Morrisett and the administration were discovered on campus and widely reported on. The School of Pharmacy building where Morrisett worked was extensively vandalized, targeting Morrisett for continuing to come to campus and UT for allowing him to continue his work. Morrisett’s laboratory door was also vandalized later on. Most recently, on International Working Women’s Day, the Littlefield fountain was found full of red dye with a message in paint that said “This is the blood of survivors that UT ignores.” We believe these actions caused the administration great anxiety, which in turn may have heightened the repression against our own campaign – however, we do not seek to blame these incidents for the minor additional struggles we have faced over the last few months. Instead, we applaud, encourage, and promote such direct attacks on the University. We have no tears for dead abusers and certainly none for the stained walls or broken windows of a University that continues to staff those abusers who remain alive today. We feel vandalism does not constitute a physical threat to the safety of any students, as graffiti is merely the expression of democracy on the walls of an institution that cares nothing for the democracy of the people. The only threats posed are financial ones that have forced UT to open up their checkbook more and frequently, and to dedicate more resources in order to continue harboring an abuser, and most importantly, the threat of a student body which is growing increasingly discontent with the rule of the University bureaucrats and threatens to break its chains.

Ultimately, the goal of our campaign for Morrisett to never return to campus was achieved, whether indirectly through our actions or not. He will never live another day on this Earth to endanger those around him with his rotten ideas and actions. One man is, however, only one man, and we emphasize the need for a continued and concerted effort to be carried out to root out patriarchal individuals and behaviors in this society. Only the organization of the people into a political weapon which can be mobilized to strike decisively at its enemies will be able to free itself from the oppression of class society and the abuses that it entails. We reject the paths of pacifism and weak resistance in the struggle against the war being waged upon women and all victims of abuse. We will take up the militant tactics proven effective and necessary by students during this campaign as a base for all future endeavors. It is only through these means that we can push our movements forward into an even greater level of confrontation with abusers and the University and begin to establish the power of the working class. The campaign against Morrisett that has been unfolding over the past two and a half months are merely a tiny glimmer of the blinding light that the people have the power to shine upon the world, forcing all of the cockroaches like Morrisett and Fenves to scatter and hide. With the growing heat generated from the militant fight against those who stand against the interests of the oppressed, the flame of the people can only burn brighter and hotter. This flame cannot and will not be extinguished – it will spread until it threatens to burn down the whole wretched University!


Mourn only for the victims!

No tears for dead abusers!

Build the militant proletarian women’s movement!



Boycott the Bullshit! Don’t Vote – Revolt!

During the presidential election of 2016, the Revolutionary Student Front endorsed and promoted an active boycott of the election. This boycott was supported by organizations all around the country who are committed to seeing real revolution and haven’t succumbed to the bad ideas that we should channel our energies into the sham of electoral politics. We write this piece to reaffirm our commitment to the principle of boycotting the running joke that is ruling class elections in the context of the upcoming US Senate elections and University of Texas Student Government elections.

Our organization subscribes to the idea of working class revolution – a revolution which takes up arms in rebellion against the capitalist state and its various institutions, including the universities. We believe this revolutionary road is the only viable path to freedom from the exploitation and violence that the capitalist system imposes on the people of the US and millions of others abroad. In the era of imperialism, and especially at this point in history when US capitalism-imperialism is becoming more openly reactionary and has the real potential to transform from a bourgeois democracy into fascism, the necessity of revolutionary politics is becoming more apparent than ever. As US capitalism-imperialism undergoes this grotesque change and the true character of this monstrous system makes itself apparent to increasingly large sections of the population, continuing to appeal to electoral forms of political action proves to be more and more of a useless strategy. In response to the attempts by the ruling class to uphold its “democratic” veneer through elections within its various institutions like the government and the universities, we seek to transform the passive boycott of these institutions which so many of the most oppressed people are already engaged in into an active boycott that will bring those who see the nature of this system into political action which is truly effective.


Why a boycott?

The capitalist-imperialist system that we live in is one where the ruling class – the capitalists – have a dictatorship over society. The institutions that exist under capitalism, from the police, to the government, to the universities, always operate for the benefit of the class in power. The police function as a repressive element for the protection of the capitalists’ private property. The government exists to exert the legislative will of the capitalists through the force of law, backed by the arms of the police and the army. The universities operate to exert the ideological control of the capitalists over the people, spreading the pro-capitalist ideas of the ruling class, the illusion of the “American dream”, and making the people into skilled, obedient workers who can earn greater profits for the capitalists. For the capitalists to maintain their rule, these institutions often have to give an illusion of democracy, whether through empty attempts at “community policing”, elections of representatives to the government, or through a Student Government that supposedly can operate and influence University policy in the interests of the students. We know that in reality, because of the way that capitalism works, that the only democracy which exists in society is democracy for the ruling class and not for the workers. No matter who is elected, what party they represent, or how progressive they might be, the interests of the capitalists are always put first.

First, let’s be clear about the state of electoral politics in the US – nearly half of people know it is an absolute sham and a waste of time. During the 2016 elections, only 59.7% of all eligible voters participated in the national election. Since it is important to take into account the phenomena of mass incarceration and a growing militarized police state prevented people from having the right to vote, this figure turns out even lower – only 55.7% of all people over the age of 18 voted. Though this figure is higher than the 2012 election, this is largely attributable to the fact that Clinton and Trump were the most despised candidates in history and the people voted out of hatred, with 37% of participants in a survey responding that they “strongly disliked” Clinton and 53% responding the same for Trump. In regards to the US Senate political figures, turnout in Texas is even more dismal, with 28.5% of eligible voters turning out in 2014. And finally, we have the enormous laughing stock that is the UT Student Government (SG) elections, where only about 20% of students participate in the Student Body Presidential elections yearly. A good chunk of the people that even turn out to vote only do so because they are friends with the candidates and not because they believe in their capacity to change things.

Image result for 2016 if no voting was a candidate

The people are growing more and more aware of the truth that whichever party wins—even if their election campaign theatrics vary—their practice once they take office is still the same. The jobs exported under Reagan continued being shipped out by Bush, Clinton, Bush Jr., and Obama. Whether a Democrat or a Republican was in office, US workers lost their jobs and faced harsh welfare cuts. With the election of Obama, many were hopeful that the time for change had come, only to be harshly disappointed by an increase in the killings of black people by a militarized police, a record-high number of deportations of undocumented people, and the ramping up of drone strikes and killing of innocent civilians in foreign countries. Throughout the years, the military still manages to receive enormous funding and the gap between the working people and the rich continues to rise steadily.

Image result for growing wealth gap

The entire governmental system, from the city level to the federal level, is set up to maintain capitalism, and not a single candidate, despite their good intentions, can do anything within this system to escape these boundaries. We have never, not even once, seen the system truly change from “working on the inside.” Those who do attempt to disrupt and change the system peacefully are overthrown by military force. And in almost every case it is the system that changes those who go into it, even those who start with the best intentions. Imperialism cannot be voted out, no matter who you vote for. We should not play a game that we can never win; we should instead promote boycott and rebellion.

We advocate for an active boycott of all elections, from the UT Student Government elections, to the US Senate elections, and to all future elections. The purpose of this boycott is to highlight the limitations of the phony “democratic” institutions in the interest of promoting revolution as the only solution to this sick and dying system. It’s clear by turnout numbers that huge sections of the population are already engaged in passive boycotts against these electoral systems; we want to transform this passivity into a call to arms so that we can get organized in an active, revolutionary way. Spending time and energy on voting and electoral campaigns entails conceding our principles and only further entrenches the idea among the people that electoral politics are a viable way to significantly change society. The conception that ruling class electoral politics offers us stands in complete contrast to the ideas that we know to be true – that the people themselves make history.

We demand real change and real democracy, which can only come about with the end of capitalism. We have no interest in lending legitimacy to any part of the bourgeois electoral institutions, whether in the universities or in the government, which operate to perpetuate the illusion that we can actually make meaningful change through voting. Revolution requires a full ideological break with capitalist “democracy” and the bourgeois elections. By lending even an inch of legitimacy to these systems, instead of actively producing propaganda and spreading revolutionary ideas, we would be misleading the people along a road that travels completely opposite to the revolutionary road. We would be dragging the people, who in large part already see these systems as fraudulent, backwards, and not leading them forwards, as is the purpose of revolutionaries. Organizing people to actively boycott the elections allows real revolutionaries to consolidate those who already see the toxic nature of the ruling class electoral machine instead of pulling them backward into a system so many of us can all see as undemocratic and working in the interest of nobody but the capitalists.


2018 US Senate Race & UT Student Government Race

During election times, and especially during this last election, we are constantly told by liberals and even so-called “revolutionaries” and “socialists” to vote for the “lesser of two evils”. The tactic of “lesser evil-ism” has only ever resulted in the gradual shifting of goalposts further and further to the right. The lesser evil of today looks like the greater evil of 4 years ago, and the lesser evil of 2020 will look like the greater evil of 2016. This process has continued on for the entire existence of the US, and it has brought us no closer to the abolition of capitalism, white supremacy, and patriarchy.

The form of rule in the US has changed along with the faces of power, but the essence of these violent and destructive systems remains the same as it has always been in the US. If we haven’t come any closer to actual freedom or democracy in the centuries of pursuing this rotten strategy, why the hell should we continue this delusion any longer? Liberals and Democrats have pushed the narrative of fighting for the lesser of evils for so long that they’ve managed to make us completely set aside the question of fighting evil at all.

Image result for a vote for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil

In the upcoming election between Ted Cruz and Robert O’Rourke, we have a choice between a well-known reactionary warmonger and a fresh, young, supposedly-progressive candidate who, in reality, has himself joined hands with his real-estate mogul father and other land developers in El Paso in going to war with the Chicano community in El Paso. While much is known about Cruz’s repulsive anti-women, anti-immigrant, etc. policies, O’Rourke has played a central role in the destruction of El Paso’s poor Chicano communities through gentrification in the interests of real estate developers and lining his own pockets. It is already evident that all this system offers us is shit, so why should we eat it? While these candidates differ on some issues, both operate within the boundaries of what is acceptable to the ruling class without exception. There is really no lesser evil when both parties agree on robbery and war on oppressed communities as a means to sustain capitalism.

For UT SG elections, one might figure that students would participate greatly in voting for something that directly impacts their day-to-day lives. However, the students know that SG elections are even more of a farce than regular electoral politics. Nearly every student knows that SG is an impotent organization with absolutely no institutional power within UT, and that the candidates most often run to give their resumes a nice little touch before going into their professional activist or political careers. The fact that this “representative” body exists within the confines of a higher-education institution that clearly does not work for the public good, but for profit, makes it even more apparent whose rules the SG is playing by and whose control is being legitimized by participation in SG elections.

One set of this year’s candidates for Student Body President-Vice President like Guneez-Hannah, ascribe the fact that 4 out of 5 UT students do not vote to the fact that they do not see candidates who represent them. This factor may play a marginal part, but it completely misses the largest aspect of abstention: UT students do not vote because it is practically useless, or even worse, an active waste of time and energies.

The platforms and desired policies of the various candidates are almost entirely inconsequential in and of themselves and mostly boil down to nothing more than a matter of principles. Despite this, we can tell through these platforms that both progressive-leaning sets of candidates, Guneez-Hannah and Colton-Mehraz, are entirely fruitless ventures, if not, in the case of the latter set, ventures that will put a dangerous man into a position of power in SG.

Though we believe Guneez-Hannah are well-intentioned candidates who want to see an improvement for oppressed people at UT and in Austin, evidenced by their willingness to discuss the changing of their Riverside platform in a way that would not contribute to the advancement of gentrification in east Austin (subject to change), we nonetheless believe that their method of political work is a dead end. Celebrating over their endorsement by the University Democrats, they reflect the ideas of “intersectional capitalism” that their campaign hinges on – that the most important goal is to make SG more representative of oppressed people and ensuring that “everyone has a seat at the table”, even if this table is that of the ruling class. A more representative or diverse system of exploitation is still violent exploitation and the representatives at this table are still forced to be the servants of a violent capitalist class. Representation is not liberation, and when we channel our hopes for change into greater representation within our same violent system, we are not only fooling ourselves but are dragging the people backwards as well. The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.


The latter set of candidates, Colton-Mehraz, is even more uninspiring in their campaigning, offering up a massive boilerplate of idealistic, unachievable, and bland typical SG “progressivism”. While Guneez-Hannah’s platform is relatively modest in its goals, Colton-Mehraz are well-groomed for their future positions as career politicians – they’ve already nailed down the tactic of promising the people far more than they know they can achieve just to score points!

Additionally, and most importantly, the head of this campaign is presidential candidate Colton Becker. Colton has been accused by multiple women of sexual harassment, including individuals currently in SG. He was involved in a Title IX case surrounding one of these incidents. According to the canned response of his campaign team (who have now put their social media accounts on private), the fact that the case is closed proves his innocence, despite the fact that the information about these cases is only available to the parties involved in the case. They said that because the person who filed the complaint did not appear to tell her side of the story that it must be false, despite the fact that we know so many survivors live in fear or are discouraged from coming forth to authorities with their stories. Despite this, there has been no sufficient reason given by anyone on Colton’s campaign team for anyone to believe that the survivor would go to Title IX on a whim just to ruin his life.

With word spreading quickly over the past several weeks about Colton’s actions, one would assume that he would have every interest in proving his innocence, since sexual harassment is a serious case. Despite the multiple accusations levied against him, he finds it necessary to only respond to the Title IX case, where he can plausibly deny guilt since it is closed. If he wanted to hold up the case if he was innocent, he would make the findings of the Title IX investigation public with names redacted. This appeal to only the “institutional” forms of resolving these issues completely ignores the fact around 75% of all sexual harassment cases in the workplace go unreported, due in large part to another study that found that 75% of women in the workplace who report sexual harassment face retaliation.

Even if we assume that the case found no wrongdoing, we have no faith in Title IX and the University institutions, the police, the courts, and any of their abilities to handle the cases of survivors and see that justice is carried out. When plaintiffs only win 2 percent of sexual harassment cases against employers, we can see that there is a seriously disturbing problem with violent, misogynistic men like Colton not being held accountable. As we stated in our speech against Morrisett, carrying out a campaign Morrisett was because of the institutionalized nature of his case. We seek to destroy abusive, violent patriarchal culture from the institutional level down to the individual level and Colton Becker is yet another man protected by his status at the university who deserves retaliation for his actions from an organized militant women’s movement

At best, useless. At worst, dangerous. This perfectly sums up UT’s Student Government.

Towards a Revolutionary Boycott and a Future of Revolt

We are constantly told that we live in the greatest democracy in the world and that voting is the highest and most powerful expression of our political ideas. We’re told that if we don’t vote we can’t complain, that going to the polls is more effective for social change than mass protest and direct action, or that if we don’t vote we are helping the conservatives. In spite of this finger-wagging, it’s clear that there is a nearly 50/50 split between the people who correctly see through the bullshit of US elections and those who still drag themselves out to the polls, only to head back to the unchanging grind of capitalism. When looking among the poorest sections of the population, who have significantly lower turnout rates than their rich counterparts, political analysts blame this low turnout primarily on the inaccessibility of polling stations, lack of time and resources to spend time waiting to vote, and voter suppression. While it is true that these factors have an effect, the truth is more in the fact that the poorest people in the US do not vote because they see that it is a waste of time. For them, everyday life under Bush was the mostly same as it was under Obama. And today, it remains just the same under Trump. The poorest Americans, who experience the deprivation of this system the most, are not enticed by the illusion of electoral politics; they are, in fact, the most likely to rebel.


The arguments pushed by the liberals who insist we organize ourselves to exercise our political power through voting has led progressives and those on the left to a point of absolute crisis at today’s historical juncture. The left has spent so long conceding to the “necessity” and “importance” of voting and the electoral system that we are completely unorganized and unprepared for the impending violent struggle and repression that is bound up with a rising fascist movement. We have been hoodwinked into putting off the question of revolutionary organizing, i.e. organizing for the preparation of revolutionary war by liberals and even “socialists” themselves. The state of the left in the US is extremely disorganized, weak, and largely toothless, while the rising fascist movement is organized, more armed, and is well-trained in military tactics and violence. The question of how to organize ourselves to defend the people from fascist violence, and how to organize for the destruction of capitalism entirely is the most important task of leftists today. To continue endorsing electoral politics and pushing people into bourgeois forms of political engagement is to ignore the rising tide of openly-terroristic fascism and the effect that this has on the oppressed masses in the US and worldwide. The oppressed masses should be led into action by a revolutionary movement that is not stuck in the fever dream of peaceful politics and legal action. To continue endorsing these politics in the face of rising fascism is to leave oppressed people unarmed, unprepared, and unorganized. The oppressed people of the US and around the world need and deserve more than the tepid rhetoric and action of the Democrats, Green Party, and every other party that spends its valuable time and resources dragging the revolutionary movement backwards. The people need nothing more at this moment than revolutionary ideology, training and preparation for community self defense, and organizations that can lead the people in taking the offensive against the fascist movement and the capitalist system that breeds it.

Time and time again, we have been fed the promises for change by politicians and their stooges, who hold up the bourgeois electoral system like a matador’s cape to lure the people into a trap. We, along with nearly the majority of the masses in the US, are quite literally sick to death of it. We are dying as a result of the electoral disease and the opportunistic capitulation of so-called revolutionary groups who continue to muddle around in the fetid swamp of electoral politics instead of taking up the task to organize for revolutionary war.

We uphold the fundamental truth that it is right to boycott and rebel against capitalism and every one of its pillars and violent institutions. We recognize the importance of our historical era as necessitating a relentless commitment to preparing the people for the threat of violence and war that rising fascism spells for the people of the world. Because we care about the people and want to see the destruction of the capitalist system that causes this enormous suffering, we do not vote, and we encourage others to not vote in any upcoming governmental or student body elections. We owe the people so much more than this system has offered them.

Image result for it is right to rebel

When we do finally vote, it will not be to toss our choice away on someone who couldn’t care less about people and only cares about profit. When we do finally vote it will mean something, because it will be in a radically new revolutionary society where the workers are on top and we have finally achieved victory.


Down with the bullshit elections!

Revolt and build revolution!


Revolutionary Student Front – Austin




“Don’t Vote, Revolt!” (2016) by Red Guards Austin

“Why We Are Boycotting the Elections” (2016) by Serve the People – Austin

Rally to Run off Morrisett Reportback

On May 28, 2016, Richard Anthony Morrisett, a professor at the UT College of Pharmacy, was arrested at his home by a Travis County Sheriff’s Deputy and received family violence assault charges for pushing and strangling his then-girlfriend. The court immediately entered an emergency protective order against Morrisett, barring him from communicating with the victim or going within 200 yards of her. Despite this, 2 months later, she was in the hospital with more injuries which Morrisett had caused by grabbing her and throwing her to the ground. The victim stated that Morrisett attacked her this second time out of anger at his indictment on the first charge. UT Police Department arrested Morrisett on the third degree felony charges of continuous family violence and repeated violation of a protective order.

Related image
Professor Richard Anthony Morrisett – mugshot (left) & UT staff photo (right)

In August 2016, UT placed Morrisett on paid administrative leave and conducted an “investigation” process which ultimately allowed Morrisett to keep his job. This is in spite of the fact that in the UT Handbook of Operating procedures, domestic violence, physical assault, and dating violence are on the list of “prohibited conduct” that it “will not tolerate.” In the past, UT has expelled and barred student athletes from campus after similar domestic violence incidents. We know that UT is willing to concede its “commitment to principles” and apply double standards in this case because they desperately want to keep the grant money that Morrisett’s research brings them. President Greg Fenves, following the release of an Austin American-Statesman article on Morrisett’s case which exposed the situation to the public, stated that he would conduct a “review” of the official UT policies regarding domestic violence. How long does Fenves estimate it will take to review the policies already in place? He says approximately within the next two months.

This two month review process, carried out by the very same institution that upheld the decision to keep Morrisett at UT, is purposeful foot-dragging on the part of UT, which wants to keep abusive professors around at UT to squeeze out as much grant money as they can before being forced to let him go. Considering the fact that both of Morrisett’s assaults happened within two months, this is far too long to let him go without punishment. We knew that carrying out a campaign, not to appeal to the administration to get him fired, but to run him off campus entirely, was necessary to protect the women and students who have to be around him on campus every day.

Image may contain: outdoor
One of several messages tagged outside of the UT College of Pharmacy

Last week, a propaganda action was carried out by unknown individuals against the College of Pharmacy building which targeted Morrisett and called out UT for their complicity in covering up his abuse. On the tail end of this, we decided that hosting a rally on Tuesday, February 13 to materialize the popular character of the demands for Morrisett’s removal was a necessary complement to ramp up public pressure on Morrisett. We spent a great deal of time in the past week both informing students on the ground about the issue and posting up propaganda all around campus and surrounding areas to spread word about the rally. Unsurprisingly, covering up the initial incident was not enough for UT – we witnessed the administration undertake an all-out campaign to remove flyers that warned students about the presence of this dangerous, abusive professor on campus. Naturally, when posters appeared calling for a rally around the issue, they went about taking these down even more quickly. The UT administration will do everything possible to remove any smudge from its good name except take action against the abuser on their staff.

Flyer posted to warn students about Morrisett, which RSF members witnessed being torn by UT workers

On the day of the action, we made our way to the protest site, passing approximately 5 bike cops from the UT Police Department and the Texas Department of Public Safety – a group of pigs known for being particularly violent against political protesters. We eventually arrived at the meetup site, but not before passing two more pigs on foot. On the opposite end of the meetup site were at least six more UTPD pigs a UT K-9 unit, and a custodial van also filled to the brim with pigs. It was clear that the pigs had shown up to pick a fight.

We quickly began passing out chant sheets and signs and started chanting outside of the College of Pharmacy at our scheduled time around 12:30 as the crowd continued consolidating. During this time, no sort of action beyond tame chanting was taken, and all protesters were reminded by the pigs to not wear any masks under threat of removal from campus. Chants like “We won’t hide, we will fight! Punch abusers on sight!” and “Fuck your grants! Fuck your greed! Student power will succeed!” were heard during this time, reflecting the anger of the crowd at both Morrisett and the university which has covered his ass. After about 15 minutes of chanting, five pigs made their way through the crowd to specifically target one lone protester, who had been doing nothing besides chanting and passing out flyers. The pigs arrested this protester on the false charges of “criminal trespassing”, while in reality, despite the lies coming from UTPD spokespig Cindy Posey, this person has never before received an official trespassing warning.


For the next 10 minutes, the anger of the protest was directed at UTPD and the Texas DPS, who showed their true selves to the onlooking crowd as nothing more than the armed enforcement wing of a violent institution which covers up abuse and protects abusers. Chants of “Who protects abusers? Pigs do, pigs do!” grew popular among the crowd, as the demarcating line between those who stand and fight against abuse and the pigs who stand in defense of abuse became more apparent. In fact, according to two studies, the pigs themselves are in large part violent abusers as well, with 40% of cops’ families experiencing domestic violence – two to four times the national average for domestic violence.


After the protester was driven away to the jail, the crowd was markedly more agitated after witnessing the direct relationship between all of the state institutions in allowing abuse against women to go unnoticed or unpunished, instead punishing those who dare to speak out. From there, the crowd marched from the pharmacy building to the steps of the UT tower, where chanting continued and a long speech followed that laid out our goals and objectives in our campaign against Morrisett.


The speech, which was originally going to be given by the arrested comrade, reiterated the facts of the situation regarding Morrisett and UT and also stated:

“We are here because we want Morrisett out immediately. We don’t ask that the University fires him, because we know that they are the ones who have been harboring this abuser and we know we cannot rely on them for our safety. We want him to be too afraid to show his face at UT and around Austin. We want Morrisett to feel the pain he has caused in the most intimate way possible. We want him to see stars as his own throat is crushed by the hands of a militant women’s movement filled with righteous anger. Abusers deserve to be driven out from any place they are found. They deserve to face the harshest of consequences. This is not just another “me too” moment where we speak up about our experiences with abuse. That kind of movement has always been insufficient and failed to bring sufficient justice to any victim of abuse. With the rise of a more openly reactionary government and a fascist movement that greenlights the open abuse and oppression of women, it’s time for us to decide whether we will be swept away by this rising tide or if we will take up arms and fight back against it.

While running Morrisett out is our immediate demand, we do not intend to stop there. Our fight against Morrisett is just one step on the long road towards building a movement that will crush abusers and eradicate patriarchy in its entirety. And all those who choose to turn a blind eye to abuse or materially support abusers for their comfort or benefit will face harsh consequences too. Greg Fenves and the UT administration were motivated to keep Morrisett on staff because their decorated doctor and his lab’s research bring in too much grant money to risk dismissing him. This is the nature of universities – they are not institutions that are run for the public good; they are run purely for profit. This case is merely one of many that shows that UT will abandon whatever “principles” they claim to have just to save their profits. We hold Fenves and the bureaucrats of UT accountable for being complicit in covering up Morrisett’s crimes, which we wouldn’t even know about today if it wasn’t for journalists’ work. We condemn the UT administration for the part they have played in endangering women and students, whether it is the ones who have to be around Morrisett or the thousands of survivors at UT that experience violence but see no justice.

On campus and across the world, patriarchy will always thrive where there is class society and capitalism. As long as there is private ownership, men will exercise ownership over women’s bodies and subject women to every type of violence. This will not end without feminist movement for working women whose ultimate goal is to end capitalism and patriarchy through revolutionary violence. A feminism that is truly for the destruction of patriarchy means a feminism that reclaims violence, which has too long been relegated for men only, and puts guns in the hands of women for the purpose of destroying capitalism. We know that begging on our hands and knees to the same institutions that are complicit in violence against us will never work. If we do not take power into our own hands, then we will remain slaves to the power of the patriarchal ruling class. We must reclaim violence so that every abuser may never again know peace inside their own homes and their jobs. So that every abuser comes face to face with the raging fury of their victims and all the women in the world. And we must take up the task of going beyond the #MeToo movement in arming ourselves and defending ourselves if we want to make these wishes a reality. We know that patriarchal violence goes way beyond Morrisett – this case is merely the most visible and institutionalized form of this violence that survivors experience every single day. We seek to move forward from this movement not only to run off Morrisett, but to see that every abuser and the trash who cover up for them is stopped with all of the anger and bullets we can give them. We want to attack Morrisett, but we can’t, and won’t, stop with him. In the interest of advancing a feminism that fights for the working class and working class women – a proletarian feminism – we must set out to destroy every institution of rape culture and patriarchal violence that exists in our society. The frat houses need to be destroyed. The co-ops where fuckboys and softboys regularly get away with date rape need to be destroyed. This university which covers up and neglects the needs of survivors needs to be destroyed. The entire global system that exploits workers and abuses women needs to be destroyed. And we can’t make that happen until we organize for proletarian feminist power to defend ourselves and launch an all-out assault to defend women and every person who is subjected to patriarchal violence. Let us go away from this rally and take this call to arms seriously. We with the Revolutionary Student Front want to see this happen through developing community self defense and campaigns to reclaim violence and launch attacks against abusers, rapists, and the institutions which promote this violence. There is a necessity, now more than ever, to develop these forms of organization for the defense of women. Let us raise up our fists and dare to struggle, dare to win, and dare to fight back!



Following this speech, several members of the crowd gave their personal testimonies, wherein they also pointed to their experiences of the utter uselessness of the university system and the police in dealing with abuse. Before dispersing around 1:20, the crowd ended off with one final chant – “UT and Morrisett sitting in a tree, A-B-U-S-I-N-G!”


It is the job of revolutionaries to defend survivors of patriarchal violence and launch an assault on the structures and ideas which reproduce this violence. It is also our job to defend our comrades, like the one who was arrested at this protest, who selflessly sacrifice their time, energy, and safety to help lead the fight against this system. We should also take the ideas they wrote out very seriously in looking at what it means to organize women for carrying out revolutionary violence against capitalism and against patriarchy. In building a movement that can seize power for the people and for women, we must take these ideas and forge them into weapons that can be wielded against the oppressors! There is no other way to move forward with forcing Morrisett and all other abusers into the holes in which they belong but through holding strong to the principle of revolutionary violence wielded by the people against the enemies.

We will fight tirelessly for our comrade’s timely release and for their bullshit charges to be dropped. Their role in helping to lead this campaign and their efforts against abusers all around Austin cannot be discounted. They play an absolutely crucial part in the revolutionary feminist leadership of our movement and they must be defended at all costs. We will come out of this fight prepared more than ever to undertake the necessary war against the Morrisett, the UT administration, UTPD, and all other abusers on campus. We commit ourselves from this point forward to consciously developing a movement which will arm and train women in the revolutionary struggle against abusers, patriarchy, and capitalism. This is not a choice for revolutionaries – it is an absolute necessity. The move to reclaim violence in the interest of proletarian feminism should signal terror for abusers like Morrisett and the thousands of others in this city. We will ensure that their nightmares becomes reality.


We ask for help from everybody reading to aid in this valued comrade’s legal defense fund, which can be found here:





Revolutionary Student Front – Austin


Stumble, Fall, Stand Tall: Summation of the Revolutionary Student Front’s Revolutionary Mental Health Program


This document represents the consolidation of our experiences and analysis as the Revolutionary Student Front (RSF) in our failed attempt over the course of 2017 in organizing the Revolutionary Mental Health Program (RMHP). The primary goal of this program was to address the mental health needs of students in a way that would primarily serve to politicize and strengthen them, to become more committed to revolution and more capable of carrying it out. The RMHP was intended to be run primarily by students, and to be oriented toward serving the needs of working-class students in particular. While we certainly learned a great deal from this initiative, we cannot classify it as anything but a failure. We hope this document will help others understand why we came to the decision to end the program, as well as provide lessons for other revolutionaries on how to carry out the mass line in the process of serving the people and building revolutionary power for the working class.

The RMHP was born out of a process of social investigation during our first semester as an organization in the fall of 2016. We set about determining what aspects of life were being neglected by the capitalist administrators of the University of Texas (UT). Naturally, we also set about gathering ideas from students on how these problems could potentially be solved without resorting to begging for handouts from university bureaucrats, whose class interests are always against those of the working class. Through many hours of discussion with students while tabling and at our public meetings, and through regular contact with disgruntled students, we uncovered numerous pressing needs facing the general student body and working-class students alike. From this point, we sought to determine a site of struggle that would appeal to the sections of the student population most ripe for radicalization and to develop a plan to address those needs in a way that would politicize these students, with the goal of course being to make them into active fighters in the revolutionary class struggle.

Out of all the needs we had brought to our attention, we determined that the accessibility, funding, and quality of mental health care for students on campus, particularly for working-class students, was a site of struggle where our organization could make a substantial impact. We drew from students’ ideas to start a student-run mental health program as a means to fulfill these needs, and attempted to consolidate them with what we believed to be a sound political analysis. We began theorizing what a “revolutionary” mental health program would look like in practice. While it was, and still is, very clear to us that mental health resources are woefully inadequate for students at UT and for the working class as a whole, the later sections of this document will explain in detail why this was an incorrect starting point for us as a revolutionary organization. Ultimately, we launched the program in the spring of 2017 and operated it for approximately six months before we made the decision to end it in September of 2017.

Both in its conception, as well as in its execution, RSF fell into grave errors in the course of operating the RMHP. Primarily, we see the program as a whole to have been rooted in an incorrect theoretical understanding and subsequent misapplication of our fundamental principle of the mass line. And so just as one would not continue construction on a house after realizing it was being built on sand (or, in our case, on the wrong lot entirely), once we had recognized our errors (laid out below) we knew the best way forward was to discontinue the program altogether. While failure can be painful and at times discouraging, our organization recognizes the truth in Mao Zedong’s words that “any newly born thing has to experience difficulties and setbacks in its growth.” Obstacles and errors are a natural part of growth, and revolutionaries do not let failures, setbacks, and defeats overcome our fighting spirit. Instead, we take joy in the criticisms that our comrades offer about our errors and seek to learn from these criticisms so that we can correct our practices and mold ourselves into better revolutionaries. RSF’s goal is, above all, to serve the people. We do not hesitate for a moment to do anything that will strengthen ourselves as fighters for the people. We are deeply grateful for the various comrades who have contributed their criticisms to help us along the path that led to the materialization of this summation.

The Program and Its Implementation

Image result for Sozialistisches Patientenkollektiv

Formation, Study, Formulation

As mentioned, the RMHP was initially born from the raw idea of a “student-led mental health group.” We knew that this concept alone was, of course, not enough to start off a revolutionary program. There are plenty of existing mental health support groups on campus facilitated by students, and they by no means make revolutionaries, so neither would a group that is run by revolutionaries but which in essence functions the same. The hope that revolutionary politics will be transferred to participants through osmosis alone is pure idealism and foolish thinking. The way that mental health support and services operate in our society is fundamentally bourgeois—that is, it serves to smooth over the potholes of capitalism, making it stronger, letting it live longer, and making it more entrenched in our behaviors and thinking. Bourgeois mental health practices cannot be made into revolutionary mental health care by simply rebranding and repackaging them as “revolutionary.” Revolutionary mental health support means sharpening the contradictions between capitalism and those whose mental states are affected badly by it. This doesn’t mean that we want things to be worse for those suffering from mental illness, but instead that we wish to draw attention to the irreconcilable contradiction between our mental health and our political-economic system. To create revolutionary mental health care, it is necessary for revolutionaries to construct qualitatively different methods than those that currently exist. The primary method of combating the symptoms of mental illness that we face under capitalism must be organizing those suffering to come into violent class conflict with the system that creates their illness. This is the only path for such individuals to move toward a society without such widespread illness.

Knowing this, we sought ways to develop the raw idea into a revolutionary one. Over the winter of 2016 and in the early spring of 2017, the leadership of RSF spent a significant amount of time studying the work “Turn Illness into a Weapon,” which recounts the experiences of the Socialist Patients’ Collective (SPK) of the University of Heidelberg, Germany, in 1970. This text, though it helped inform our theoretical understanding of the relationship between illness and capitalism, was lacking in concrete summations of how they put their understanding into practice. Perhaps this omission was intentional on their part, since being Marxists, they knew as well as we know that we cannot copy and paste methods from one time and place onto another expecting similar results—we must always make concrete analyses of concrete conditions. On the other hand, Mao Zedong carefully laid out the principles of guerrilla warfare as they applied to Chinese conditions and had faith that those revolutionaries reading him outside of China would have sense enough to learn from the particular conditions of the Chinese situation and draw out universal lessons from them that could be applied in other situations. No explanation of the particular conditions and tactics of the SPK in Heidelberg could be found in their text beyond their vague principle of “political agitation” as their means of therapy. Ultimately, this left us with essentially no preexisting history or experiences to draw from and apply to our work. Apart from the SPK, no formalized attempts have been made by revolutionary organizations specifically to address the issue of mental health under capitalism. In retrospect, this should have been a warning sign. Instead, we took it as a bold challenge—to attempt to do what few if any before us had done.

Image result for Sozialistisches Patientenkollektiv

As an organization, up to this point, we had very little theoretical knowledge of what the process of the mass line truly consisted of, and we had even less experience carrying out this process ourselves. Following our study of “Turn Illness into a Weapon,” we faced a roadblock in the early spring of 2017 on how to make the leap from our knowledge about how mental illness is conditioned under capitalism to a practice that would make mental health practices serve revolutionary means. Eventually, this gave way to a restlessness in the leadership of our organization. Even though all we knew about was, on one hand, the theoretical side of mental health deprivation under capitalism and, on the other hand, the practices of bourgeois mental health, we thought that only by putting our current knowledge into practice and struggling over time would we would come to a better understanding of how to formulate a truly revolutionary program. However, just as one can’t learn to build socialism by practicing capitalism, one also cannot put bourgeois mental health services into practice and expect to learn revolutionary mental health, no matter what the subjective outlook is of the individuals trying to do so. In fact, it is just the opposite. Even if an individual considers themselves a revolutionary, getting more deeply involved carrying out bourgeois mental health practices will almost always serve as a hindrance to adopting any sort of revolutionary outlook on mental health.

Running, Stumbling

So then, pushed forward by our childish impatience, we formally announced the formation of the RMHP, complete with our rudimentary theoretical understanding. We set about cementing the program into place late in the spring of 2017. The RMHP began with one small Closed Session group, made up of 4–6 individuals who met on a weekly basis practicing a fundamentally bourgeois sort of group talk therapy among otherwise revolutionary individuals. From the very outset of the program, we imported a non-student individual who was involved in other revolutionary organizations in Austin to facilitate the group’s discussion. The initial goal of this was to serve as a kickstarter for the RSF leaders who were taking the lead on the RMHP to develop a better understanding of how to go about basic therapeutic procedures (handling trauma, inter-participant conflict resolution, etc.). In addition, we believed this person’s prior experience in the field would give them an improved understanding of how to develop a program that was led by politics and not by service program work. This process of integrating people with backgrounds in bourgeois social work and therapy, incorrectly thinking that their experience would offer the expertise that the program needed continued over the entire existence of the RMHP to the detriment of the program and its participants.

Throughout the existence of this group and into the summer and fall sessions, the fundamental techniques and practices of the groups remained the same. There were two main techniques employed in Closed Sessions and Open Sessions, known as “circling” and “authentic relating.” Essentially, these techniques placed an immense importance on developing deeper interpersonal ties between individuals through helping them learn how to better communicate with each other and understand each other’s personal difficulties. The goal of this process was to find greater interpersonal unity and understanding among participants and allow participants to see struggles with mental health not as individual experiences but as shared ones that are also deeply interconnected with other aspects of society. These techniques also included aspects of “social exercises,” which focused on participants asking and answering difficult questions about each other, and were often an uncomfortable trial. The way that these social exercises were geared, however, were focused on personal relations. For example, the participants might form a line and move from one partner to the next, answering the question, “What do I think that you think about me?” These sorts of exercises often brought discomfort and, in retrospect, offered a kernel of correctness that could have been pushed forward, politicized, and developed into a revolutionary exercise. They could have, for instance, been developed to increase our comrades’ comfortability with making and receiving political criticisms and making self-criticisms about our work and behaviors. However, with the focus remaining on personal relations, the result was a perpetual liberal focus on interpersonal unity over political unity. In group discussions, the degree to which one’s personal issues were able to be linked with patriarchy, white supremacy, alienation, and other pillars of capitalism was limited. A liberal hesitancy meant that the solution to these issues, found only through participation in class struggle, was never actively put forth to participants. The result was an insular circle of back-patting and uncritical affirmation, where participants were consoled but given no real help to prepare them for carrying out war against the illness ailing them and against the conditions at the root of these illnesses.

As this first Closed Session came to a close at the end of the spring semester, a number of changes within the program’s structure took place. First, we hosted our very first Open Session of the RMHP, which was meant to incorporate all individuals into the RMHP who could not commit to participating in weekly Closed Sessions but nonetheless wanted a place where they could come. Again, we took the circling and authentic relating techniques as a basis for this program and watered them down so they could be made to fit relations between two complete strangers. The facilitation of this style of group was made possible only with the importation of another non-student organizer who had experiences in a New Age–style therapy and mindfulness-centered group exercises. This first Open Session was extremely well-attended, with many participants excited for our new venture into the field of mental health. Unsurprisingly, in retrospect, the vast majority of these people did not return to another Open Session. And on top of that, with the natural exodus of students that comes with the summer break, rather than take time during the summer to step back to examine our experiences with bourgeois mental health practices and reformulate our program, we pushed forward in attempting to further develop the program as it existed. We continued with the Open Sessions weekly throughout the summer in addition to having one Closed Session per week.

By summer, the program was developing into a broader project, drawing in people who were not previously involved with RSF but who were interested in helping to guide and/or administrate our initiative. The continuation of the program throughout the summer entailed an enormous amount of work on a near-daily basis for the organizers involved in its administration. Along with the expansion came the further integration of the previously mentioned non-student facilitators as key factors in determining the direction of the groups and program. Because of our belief in the quality of their experience with bourgeois mental health practices as well as their centrality in the facilitation of the program, these people were often given undue deference in their guidance of the program. This resulted in us leaving the program to settle further and further into its toothless, liberal methods. Over the course of the summer, the problem of how to place politics at the helm of the program was one constantly brought up at every administrative meeting, despite no concrete answers arriving from the discussions. Though at times there was a minority voice that resisted the politicizing of the RMHP altogether, the majority of us recognized the necessity to not only bring politics into the program, but make it the key aspect. We realized during this time that the RMHP as it was being run was not achieving this end by any means, and the question of politicization constantly racked our brains. Over the summer months, we could all tell that no progress was being made on this goal, no matter how many times we slammed our heads into the wall. We didn’t yet realize the truth stated earlier in this paper: correct ideas about revolutionary mental health practices cannot be derived from carrying out bourgeois mental health practices. Nonetheless, we continued on, working half-heartedly without a definite plan or direction, with the liberal thinking that “so long as one remains a monk, one goes on tolling the bell.” We were convinced that one day, after countless hours of knowingly walking in the wrong direction, we would somehow stumble upon the correct path or have it magically appear before our eyes.

This painful process continued throughout the summer and into the beginning of the fall 2017 semester, when the majority of RSF members and students returned to campus. Without any more clear of an idea on how to make our “revolutionary” program truly revolutionary, we still wearily persisted. Several weeks into the semester, it was determined that one of the non-student facilitators at the center of the program was using the influence and power of their position over others in the group for their own self-serving ends, leading to their expulsion from the RMHP and severe discipline by their organization. This situation, though it was not one of abuse or violence, placed participants in the program at risk, and is ultimately an error that we as RSF take responsibility for and take very seriously. We received warnings from other organizers outside of RSF about the inherent dangers of integrating non-student organizers into the RMHP, which was full of younger and more vulnerable individuals. Despite this, we overlooked such warnings because we placed an undue amount of trust in individuals without the consideration that they could possibly misuse their position of power.

Following this debacle, we still continued onward for a few weeks, assuming that the removal of the New Age practitioner would help the push toward politicization of the program win out. Different members of RSF took lead over the facilitation of the Open Sessions, and the integration of politics into the framework of the sessions began to take place. That is, the framework itself was not being changed into a revolutionary one, but politics were being thrown in as a necessary addition so as to fulfill the title of a “revolutionary” program. Instead of being left out entirely, the politics of the program instead became an afterthought, where time would be set to answer questions as a group and contemplate explicitly on the role of capitalism in our day-to-day lives. Just as revolutionaries running a program that calls itself revolutionary does not in fact make it revolutionary, a program with a little red political tail pinned on the end of it is not revolutionary either. In all programs that serve the people, revolutionary politics must remain firmly in command because, again, our politics, which have the ultimate aim of carrying out revolutionary war, are the only thing that will bring about the conditions necessary for doing away with alienation and exploitation altogether.

In mid-September of 2017, after about 3 weeks of continuing on this path, we received a detailed, thoughtful, and damning criticism of the RMHP from close comrades that caused substantial reflection on the realities of the program. This criticism brought us to realize that despite our months of practice, we were still no closer to developing a program for how to wage war to overcome our mental health issues in a revolutionary way. We determined that continuing forward along the path of using bourgeois mental health practices was not only unhelpful in any way for overcoming mental illness, but it was in fact actively putting many participants in a worse position than they were before. Additionally, we determined that for our organizers and the revolutionary movement in Austin as a whole, the RMHP was not strengthening our capacity to fight and improve ourselves. On the contrary, it was an enormous detriment that siphoned our time and energy and left us weaker in the face of the enemies that we so frequently come into conflict with. We then publicly announced the end of the RMHP.



Our first major error of many appeared early in the winter of 2016, before we had even begun to build the RMHP. RSF, starting with a tiny handful of people, had not been in existence for even a semester. Despite this, we had grown a significant degree in that time, but we were nevertheless impatient for more growth. We held the incorrect belief that in order to be an organization that properly operates according to the mass line, we must rapidly develop a mass base of supporters and members. We valued the quantity of individuals and our work over the quality. We believed that central to being a “mass organization” and seeing the rapid growth we sought was having a specifically mass-based program that could serve the people. We thought the only way we could claim to adhere to the mass line was to have something to show for it. This conception bred a mentality that placed the production of things, programs, or work in general as taking priority above the correct political trajectory and development of the program and our organization—this is an error we refer to as “productivism.” For a revolutionary organization seeking to destroy the existing social system, the development of trust and ties with a community and growing a sustained number of quality supporters and members is by no means something that can be built up overnight or over one semester. Particularly for those who live in the belly of the imperialist beast, the process of building a popular movement to destroy capitalism is an arduous and lengthy effort. No matter how large a movement is, if it is not guided by a correct and scientific political approach, it will fail to seize power and overthrow the ruling class. If the working class is not guided by this correct approach, its outbursts will at best rattle the chains binding the working class, not shatter them. By prioritizing the desire to start up a mass-based program without regard for making a careful, correct analysis of the political basis of this program or what results would come from our course of action, we worked in a way that ultimately went against the long-term interests of the people we work for. All initiatives led by a revolutionary organization should have the interest of building revolutionary forces and bringing the people deeper into the class struggle as its priority. The “service,” or direct material aid given by these initiatives must always take back seat to the political aspect—this is what differentiates a revolutionary organization from a nonprofit charity that happens to wave around red flags. The error of productivism made itself apparent from before the conception of the RMHP through to its end. This fact clearly reflects a tendency among the organization as a whole that must be rooted out for our work to continue along a correct path, since it would be ludicrous to separate the politics of the program from that of the leading organization. The error of productivism is, above all, a disease that eats away at the revolutionary heart of an organization and can never lead it down the path of revolution, but only waste people’s time and reinforce capitalism.

In practice, this productivism was behind many of the ways that the program operated as well. It also served as a breeding grounds for liberal misconceptions among the organizers that proved dangerous to its participants.

First, after we hit a wall in our attempts to properly theorize the program, we justified our attempts to move forward and “just do it” with the thinking that correct ideas (about how to treat mental health in a revolutionary fashion) would come only through social practice. The maxim that correct ideas come about only through social practice remains true, but, as we said before, carrying out bourgeois mental health practices will not suddenly yield answers about revolutionary mental health practices. The maxim holds true in that we are closer to those correct ideas now than we were in the past, and have determined 101 ways to not run a revolutionary mental health program, but at no point in our time operating the RMHP, or even currently, did we have the correct ideas. Our hurried mentality—prioritizing obvious, tangible action of some kind rather than undertaking the best work we could that was truly militant and revolutionary—cost us a great deal of time and energy for a program that was not only doomed but which also caused us serious setbacks as well.

Second, since none of the initial organizers with RSF had experience with handling mental health or therapy groups, we saw it necessary to import “experienced” non-student organizers from outside of campus to help facilitate the actual running of the groups. We saw the production of the service (the sessions) as key over developing the self-sufficiency of the program. In reality, this hindered the development of our student organizers, who in fact managed to take control of the groups with very little interruption when the off-campus organizers were no longer in command.

Our seeking of “experienced” outsiders also reflected this productivism in our analysis of what the nature of their experience was. Was it experience with revolutionary therapy? Certainly not. It was experience with, and ideological commitment to, bourgeois therapy. We mistakenly thought there was significant overlap between the practice being imported and revolutionary practice, in terms of the skills and outlook necessary to carry them out. But this could not be further from the case—the two are actually direct and antagonistic opposites: Revolutionary therapy places politics at its center. It demands struggle and breeds resilience and strength, and wins people to unite with their real friends to take up the struggle to destroy their real enemies. To quote “Unnatural Disasters” by Red Guards Austin, revolutionaries “exist to fight in the rift between the people and the state.” Revolutionary therapy exposes the way the capitalist state leaves the masses to suffer and die of mental illness, sharpening the contradictions between the people and the ruling class. Bourgeois therapy places individuals at its center, concedes to unprincipled peace, and breeds complacency and weakness. It enters the rift between the state and the suffering people and sews it up, treasonously restoring the ruling class’s ability to harm and control them.

During the weekly meetings of the RMHP organizers, even though politicization was always a pressing issue, the question that was never answered was, “How do we move our groups forward along the revolutionary path this week?” Time was instead constantly spent addressing the questions, “How are we going to keep the groups running consistently, on time, with prepared facilitators, etc.?” With the program just barely keeping its head above water, we were perpetually focused on keeping the group from drowning for one more week. The importance of the program’s continuation took precedence over taking a step back and spending time analyzing how things were being done. We had the incorrect belief that because participants seemed to be pleased with how the program was going, the program seemed to be running relatively smoothly—and that since we were staying constantly busy with something going on from week to week, we must be on the right track. Suspending the program periodically to allow us time to make these analyses would have been useful, just as concluding it has been, in looking deep into the real problems of the program and their solutions. However, this way of looking at things would have completely gone against our productivist mindset of, “If we aren’t consistently doing work and continuing this program nonstop from week to week then we are completely losing face and credibility in the eyes of the participants.” Revolutionary programs should never start from a desire to simply do things, and never fall into the dead end of mere charity work. Above all, they should be advancing the political level of those we serve primarily through bringing them into struggle, and heightening the overall level of class struggle in our cities.

This truth points to yet another, profound error in our productivist thinking. Overemphasis on the tangible services provided by programs like the RMHP reflects a woefully incorrect, inadequate understanding of the material impact that revolutionary ideology has on people and their mental health. Throughout the program, we held the conception that the RMHP should strive for a balance between politics and material support, walking a tightrope with a stick that needed to be equally weighted on both sides. However, as Karl Marx stressed while explaining the interconnected relationship between theory and material force, “material force must be overthrown by material force; but theory also becomes a material force as soon as it has gripped the masses.” And when it comes to a revolutionary understanding of handling mental health, this understanding is utterly critical and cannot be understated.dhkpc3

At the height of the postmodern age, when the most visible functional alternatives to capitalism, the People’s Republic of China and the USSR, have long since slid backward into capitalism, a political fog has rolled in, leaving the people disoriented and hardly able to see their hands in front of their faces. With seemingly no route forward, and with the crises and contradictions of capitalism crushing the people further, this political fog begins to suffocate the people, who are desperately crying out for a solution. This bleak historical situation is only further cause for anxiety, depression, and various other mental health conditions that drive us further into the depths of despair. Being a revolutionary organization, we believe the way to lead people out of this fog is to put our revolutionary theory, developed over the course of history, into practice. With the light that our politics brings, we are able to progress through the fog and help guide the people past the dismal conditions of contemporary life. For everyone who understands and accepts the scientific and correct nature of this theory and the power it gives us to find and follow a path that will bring us out of this hell, the material effect this light has is tremendous and cannot be confined to “ideology.”

The prevailing bourgeois order encourages us at every turn to indulge in an ugly, narrow, addicted pleasure-seeking, to lead lives fixated on ourselves and feeding our cravings. What’s more, through its many institutions the ruling class belittles and rules out as pathetic or juvenile the idea that there is another way to live. This is just one more cruelty that the ruling class inflicts on us—leading us to betray ourselves into living undignified lives. The revolutionary struggle to destroy capitalism is the only real force on earth to offer an entirely different way of living—a way that sees that our own good is bound up irrevocably and permanently with the good of the broad masses. Fully embracing the revolutionary struggle carries us into a perspective and a way of acting in the world that is decisively not focused on our own narrow selves or our cravings—a fundamentally dignified way of living that is humble but ferociously dedicated. Since a large part of what people struggle with in their mental illness is a sharply negative self-conception, taking up revolutionary struggle concretely and decisively transforms people’s self-image, due not to any illusion or simple reframing of perception but rather to the fact that, materially, who they really are has been radically transformed.

In a world devoid of apparent meaning, full of seemingly unpredictable horrors, revolutionary theory brings the people understanding, hope, and a will to push forward that gives life to those formerly lifeless and hopeless. The cause of building revolution, which revolutionary theory informs, gives us reason to wake up in the morning and push through day by day. Because we understand this theory, we know there is no other way to exist in this world beyond doing what is necessary to destroy the society that oppresses us so that we may build one that does not. Our knowledge of and commitment to this revolutionary path goes beyond giving us the mere will to live and strength to wage war to suppress our mental illnesses—it steels us to face death itself and give our lives for the people and for the revolution whenever it is demanded. And exactly by facing death squarely and accepting it as an inevitability in every life, we find that our perspective is broadened, and a path is opened to a virtually unlimited field of action for forging a path out of this dark and bloody world.


In regards to mental health, once theory is truly grasped by people, it does just as Marx said: it creates a material force, the strongest force that exists when it comes to aiding us in our struggles with our mental illnesses and overcoming the obstacles we face because of them.

Thus, there is no reason that the political side of the RMHP should have taken a back seat, or been left out entirely, if we truly wished to give material assistance to the participants. Liberals and postmodernists balk at the idea of using a mental health program to push politics, but it is only unconscionable because they adhere to an ideology that is negative in spirit and can serve only to thicken the fog. Meanwhile, we who have taken up this ideology ought to be partisans, and we must reject utterly the idea that it is in any way harmful to spread our ideology and seek hegemony for it in all places. Just the opposite. Any reluctance to share the ideology we know to be scientifically correct—an ideology that is life-affirming because it is the sole method for understanding and ending the problems that confront us—can only be the result of that residual hand-wringing liberal squeamishness, an adherence to a pacifying, stultifying, and ultimately strangulating etiquette that keeps us alienated from each other and from the truth. Who are we doing a favor by pretending we do not see that our ideology is correct, and therefore all-powerful? Who are we doing a favor by leaving those we meet lost in this miserable fog full of listless people with no sure convictions, even if sharing our ideology means struggling to shake them out of a stupor? Is it not more paternalistic to believe that someone cannot bear to hear a new idea that contradicts what they believe? In stark contrast to the liberal outlook on politics, revolutionary ideology is positive in spirit, and putting this ideology into practice is the only means of beginning to truly burn off the fog and light the way out for the millions of sick, depressed, and oppressed people.

And ultimately, our productivism reinforced a toxic liberalism that festered in the group for weeks and served to cover up the above-mentioned case of an inappropriate relationship between one of the non-student facilitators and another member of the program. Considering the delicate circumstances surrounding the RMHP, where mental health issues and vulnerability are out in the open, improper behavior by those with positions of influence or informal power cannot be tolerated. This situation was known about for several weeks by many facilitators-in-training for the program and one of RSF’s program administrators and was kept hidden from other program administrators. When this situation finally came to light, it was quickly resolved. The non-student organizer was removed from the RMHP and their organization was notified about the situation so that a disciplinary process and serious method of correcting this person’s thinking and behavior could be undertaken. The reason that those who knew about this person’s conduct did not bring it up to the collective was that they were concerned with the program collapsing if this person was not around to facilitate and hold it up. Could there be a more stark demonstration  of our productivism than this fact? In practice, concern for the stable functioning of the program clearly came before not only the politics of the program but even the safety and well-being of others involved and participating in the RMHP. Our single-track thinking exposed RMHP participants and effectively endangered them by knowingly having this person in the presence of someone who might have exploited their vulnerabilities. This sort of liberalism is absolutely unacceptable for any revolutionary organization, and it betrays the cause of the organization and the people. All participants in the group sessions where this non-student organizer was facilitating were notified shortly after the incident, and this organizer is still in an extended process of struggle and rectification with their organization. As for the organizers with the RMHP and RSF who kept their knowledge of the incident under wraps, they were criticized thoroughly and their rectification has been resolved at this time.

If a program’s functioning is entirely contingent on one person’s participation, particularly if that person acts as they did, then the program deserves to drown. Thus another aspect of productivism is the individualistic idea that we should “just let everyone do what they’re naturally best at” without regard for the overall needs and development of the organization. Because we recognize, and have seen in practice, the truth that revolutionaries can become corrupted and take up bourgeois ideas and practices, we must be ready to remove these leaders from their positions at any point and replace them with comrades who are sufficiently experienced to handle their positions. We can’t narrowly restrict ourselves to the position of soldier or politician. We must be both politician and soldier, confident and able to take up whatever task required for the organization. To be an effective revolutionary, a skilled writer cannot devote themselves merely to writing—they must also learn to speak well, punch hard and shoot well, work hard, design propaganda, communicate well with others, and so on. This is true not only because of the fact that revolutionary leadership is not free from corruption, but also because our enemies—the fascists and the state—target and wish to eliminate our membership and leadership. For one who lives life truly as a revolutionary, particularly in an era of rising fascism, there is no shortage of people who wish to see them dead. The revolutionary constantly carries their life lightly on their fingertips. As Chairman Fred Hampton of the Black Panther Party of Illinois said, “I believe I was born not to die in a car wreck or slipping on a piece of ice, or of a bad heart. . . . I believe that I’m going to die as a revolutionary in the international proletarian struggle.” The knowledge that prison or death awaits us as revolutionaries aiming to destroy capitalism should be enough to encourage us to develop our organization in a thorough and well-rounded manner, making ourselves replaceable at every turn. This was not the case for the RMHP, and it fed into our failures enormously.

Image result for chairman fred hampton quote

For those that were most involved in the operation of the RMHP, it was an enormous commitment that left them little time to contribute to the broader revolutionary movement in Austin. While these tasks were gladly taken up with the belief that the program was advancing the revolutionary cause by caring for the mental health of our comrades and those we serve, we can now see that it was in fact entirely devoid of any revolutionary character, offering no real solutions to mental illness. The RMHP drained our organizers and participants of time and resources that would have been better spent toward initiatives that would develop our strength to not only defend against fascism, but also to study, be among the people, and develop our organization in preparation for the necessary violent battles to come. Of course, we never abandoned these efforts entirely. However, we lost valuable ground by spreading ourselves thin and focusing a great deal of effort on a program that was not rooted in service of the revolution.

The Mass Line

With our incorrect, productivist ideas as a starting (and ending) point, we set out from our first semester to conduct the first step of the mass line. This step dictates that we must gather the various scattered and unsystematic ideas of the people about the issues affecting their everyday lives. We thought that the result of this process would necessarily be to identify an area of struggle that affected people the most and build a program centered around the goal of addressing this specific need.

The “Survival Programs” of the Black Panther Party were the Panthers’ attempt at carrying out the mass line in their communities, and we uncritically adopted their methods. There are many reasons this approach was incorrect.

Most fundamentally, if we begin from the idea that there needs to be a program whose central purpose and reason for existing is to provide some specific tangible aid, it will by that fact alone not be able to put politicization first. Even if there is an intention and desire for politicization and recruitment to occur within the program, the overall life of such a program will inevitably wind up subordinated to the logistical needs of continuing to provide that tangible service. An organization cannot have two central tasks.criminals-or-activists-a-hard-look-at-the-black-panther-party-902-body-image-1441211007-size_1000

Huey P. Newton says about the Party’s Survival Programs, “We called them ‘survival programs pending revolution’, since we needed long-term programs and a disciplined organisation to carry them out. They were designed to help the people survive until their consciousness is raised.” These programs brought necessary services to the people, including free breakfast for children, sickle cell anemia testing, and cooperative housing, among many other services. Before the advent of the non-profit industrial complex, these programs were the first of their kind run by revolutionaries to serve the people and integrate themselves among the people of their neighborhoods. What the programs lacked, unfortunately, was an ability to go beyond merely helping people to survive and bring the necessary revolutionary politics to the people so the masses could be organized into a revolutionary force. Always at the center of these Survival Programs was the service being given and not the politics, and the raising of political consciousness was always put off until some later time.

With the rapid development of non-profit organizations and NGOs in the US over the past decades (leading US NGOs to become the world’s 10th largest economy over Canada), the fact that providing services in and of themselves do not constitute revolutionary action has become far more apparent. To refer again the principle that revolutionaries should operate within the rift between the state and the people, it is no coincidence that doing work to sew up this rift has become such a lucrative industry — it’s a growing necessity for the ruling class as the monster of US imperialism grows more monstrous and grotesque. With prominent former leaders of the Black Panther Party like Elaine Brown themselves betraying the revolutionary cause and working as non-profit CEOs today, the inevitable conclusion of the Survival Program’s orientation is all the more apparent.


On top of this, we as revolutionaries must never come into our work with preconceived notions of what tactic should be pursued. It’s a fact, as Mao said, that “the masses are the real heroes, while we ourselves are often childish and ignorant.” When we recklessly dive into taking up huge endeavors without any knowledge, or worse, totally incorrect knowledge about how to solve the problems of the people, we both actively harm the interests of the people and showcase extreme arrogance. In this case, we set out with the desire to serve working-class students who needed mental health services by simply having a “revolutionary” program attached to RSF. From there we attempted to fit whatever ideas or particular problems the people were facing into this framework. If they had been facing hunger, it would have been a “revolutionary” food program. If they had been facing homelessness, it would have been a “revolutionary” housing program. This approach is completely backward and is attempting to fit square pegs into round holes. It isn’t until we gather the ideas of the masses, along with analyzing them in the context of our conditions, that we can determine what the best course of action will be.

Given this, we should not have taken it as a given that this type of mental health program was the best way for a revolutionary organization to serve the mental health needs of the people. On the surface it may seem like a given that, for revolutionaries, combating deficiencies in mental health care among the people means developing programs, clinics, groups, and so on to meet that need while using revolutionary politics to guide its methods. But thinking that this course of action can actually address the problem flies in the face of the realities we are actually confronted by. For example, with the question of homelessness, since there are four empty homes in the US for every homeless person, they could all theoretically be given debt-free homes by a revolutionary group with a substantial amount of power or money. For a brief instant, homelessness would have been eradicated. But since the questions of unemployment, low wages, lack of education, mental health, drug addiction—along with all other forms of ruling-class oppression that confront them—are not simultaneously being addressed, the vast majority of these people would return to homelessness in a very short time. The adoption of the “service program” style of work reflected a continuation of the productivist mindset, narrowly thinking that the services and immediate benefits we brought to people were of the greatest value in the fight for resolving that particular need as well as the needs of revolution.

The same principle applies to mental health, which in retrospect should have been blatantly obvious given our position in our statement announcing the formation of the RMHP. We stated, in agreement with the SPK’s theorization, that under capitalism, everyone is ill (obviously to varying degrees expressed in different ways). Capitalist social relations necessarily entail social alienation, and these relations are at the root of most mental health issues. Thus, unless the question of how to bring about the destruction of these capitalist social relations is at the forefront of any attempt to combat mental health issues, our practice is doomed to be qualitatively no different from the bourgeois mental health service system or that of the slimy nonprofit organizations. We instead believe that the more helpful path for any person’s mental health is to become involved in class struggle. The alienation, despair, and depravity that capitalism imposes on our lives are best countered not by programs like the RMHP, or any other Survival Programs. In a world where nearly every aspect of our lives is controlled by the capitalist class, the only truly free and liberating act that can return any sense of meaning to our lives is rebellion through revolutionary violence. It is simultaneously the only free action and the necessary action to destroy capitalism and the conditions oppressing us and develop a classless society.

Even more deeply, we must understand that if we begin with the wrong idea about how to address the questions, the subjective will of the organizers will not change the objective qualities of the organization’s work. An organization that sees an unmet need among the community and truly places politics first will not simply adopt the model of the existing bourgeois institutions—in this case, group talk therapy sessions. Placing politics first will lead us to qualitatively different forms of addressing the issues altogether.

And this brings us to the question of what it truly means to place politics first. We understand the central task of revolution is the seizure of power through armed force. The class character of all of our initiatives can therefore be assessed only by asking whether, objectively, they are subordinated to successfully advancing our ability to wield revolutionary proletarian violence to settle the question of power through war. For instance, in an area where the capitalist state has collapsed and can no longer play any role in meeting people’s basic economic and social needs, for the new revolutionary order to meet those needs concretely, and in a fuller and more all-around way than the old state ever did, can in itself win support for the revolutionary forces that will allow its overall political-military endeavors to be all the more effective. Therefore, providing services that would otherwise, in a context of bourgeois power, constitute economism would in fact, in a context of proletarian power, constitute revolutionary work, because in that context they would be forming the embryo of administrative institutions for the new revolutionary state.

Under the new state, these needs will not be addressed in the same way as in the old bourgeois state – the question of homelessness will not be detached from the questions of work, addiction, mental health, housing. Likewise, the question of mental health will not be divorced from its related issues, along with the issue of revolution. The work done by the Revolutionary People’s Liberation Party/Front (DHKP-C) in Turkey to combat drug addiction in popular neighborhoods in Istanbul where they have largely won power through military force is a testament to this fact. In these neighborhoods, the DHKP-C operates clinics called Centers for Struggle and Liberation Against Drugs, where addicts can enter into not into bourgeois rehabilitation, but proletarian rehabilitation. In these clinics, those in rehabilitation are offered political education, education in production (in fields like carpentry, welding, etc.), and social integration into a revolutionary community who works tirelessly to fight violently against the fascist Turkish state. Through these methods, the DHKP-C is able to address the question of addiction by reintegrating addicts into all realms of social life and, most importantly, push them forward into the revolutionary struggle that pushes drugs and addiction on the whole people.dhkpc1

Outside of this context, where the capitalist state, including in its manifestation as NGOs, still has power, a different case exists: constructing such service-oriented programs is either a redundant or inevitably economistic task. If the demand is, for instance, to address mental health problems among the masses, then the best solution to the demand simply comes through the integration of participants into the struggle to build red power. In this case, no separate program should even exist because any such program would be redundant—the purpose of the original revolutionary organization was already to do exactly what the new one would be doing. The task of that organization should not be to create programs, but create campaigns to stress the interrelated nature of struggle for revolution with the fight against illness. On the other hand, if the demand is for something like food and basic necessities that cannot be addressed immediately by revolutionary struggle, then for reasons we discussed above, it is doomed to the economism of the Survival Programs. In either case, we see that we should not be constructing stand-alone service programs. Instead we should take the path of, first, building the political instruments that we already scientifically know are needed in order to destroy ruling-class power and construct a new, proletarian state and then orient the way we wield those tools based on our concrete analysis of the concrete economic and social needs of our communities.

Though we still do not know for certain the correct path to concretely deal with mental health in a revolutionary fashion, we are certain it has nothing at all to do with the bourgeois therapy–style practice preferred by liberals and faux-radicals. The freedom and necessity of rebellion means physically preparing ourselves to fight for the purpose of advancing toward the initiation of a revolutionary people’s war. The importance of this physical preparation in combating mental health issues cannot be understated either. Physical training has a positive influence on one’s mental health far beyond the endorphin release that the biological determinists emphasize—it makes us more mentally disciplined, willing to struggle with our bodily limits, and overcome difficulties in a way we once thought impossible. What’s more, every time we thwart our urges to engage in unhealthy coping mechanisms and, in their place, practice healthy coping mechanisms instead, we carry out what Red Guards Austin refers to as “contradictory action,” materially transforming our actions and thought patterns so that a way of living takes over that advances our health along with the revolutionary cause and leaves little room for unhealthy, reactionary thoughts and actions. Physical training and all such transformations that increase our all-around discipline make us more prepared to carry the light of the revolutionary ideology that will lead the way out of the swamp of capitalism.

Image may contain: meme and text

Contrary to popular belief, individualistic and indulgent “self-care” and condescending back-patting offered by liberals will not make the despair of life under capitalism any easier, nor will it give meaning to our existence. Whether they realize it or not, the people promoting these types of solutions are prescribing death for the people and especially for the working class. They kill us with sugar-coated bullets, justifying our self-destructive escape into addiction (of all various sorts) because “everyone deals with things their own way,” or because “it’s not our fault we’re like this.” Being stabbed by the sharp truth is infinitely better than being shot by these sweetened lies. There is no other option in the face of addiction, mental illness, and poverty but to reclaim our health and our lives by fighting tooth and nail for it. This fight necessarily entails armed conflict and mobilizing the people in a war against the capitalist state. Revolutionary organizations should serve as schools for war, preparing their organizers and the people through vicious struggles, open street battles against fascists and the state, and clandestine militant action in preparation for the building of a people’s war. The RMHP did not serve at all to prepare our organizers or the participants for this task, but in fact served the opposite task: weakening us mentally and organizationally and strengthening the capitalists and reactionaries by comparison.

The second issue with the orientation of service programs in their economistic form, particularly for revolutionary student organizations, is the fact that students are not homogenous in their class background or class stand. Despite how much an organization’s service program might appeal to and draw in working-class students, since the politics will always be secondary to the service, these programs have a great potential to draw in people who also actively stand unapologetically on the side of the capitalists or fascists. This is detrimental to our movement in two ways. First, we may be unwittingly giving aid to our enemies, which goes entirely against the principles of the war that we hope to initiate one day. More importantly, we are exposing ourselves, especially in the case of a mental health program, to an enormous security risk that can be exploited by fascist groups as well as the police and FBI. By sending individuals undercover to a service program like the RMHP, where they can’t be reasonably denied (unless they are too stupidly obvious) since the primary aspect of the program is “service,” there is a great deal of sensitive information that can be gained about local organizers that fascists and the FBI would love to use to attack and undermine the revolutionary movement in our city. The FBI’s COINTELPRO program used by the state to attack the Black Panther Party and Huey P. Newton are a key example of the way this vulnerability can be exploited. By having an extensive folder on Huey P. Newton, which included psychological files related to his medical history, they were able to turn Huey from a revolutionary into a drug addict by strategically targeting his weaknesses and setting up scenarios where they knew how he would react, using this to their advantage. Though the fascists aren’t nearly as organized or crafty as the FBI at this point, sensitive information regarding mental health that might have been discussed at RMHP sessions would have been of great value to any person trying to grasp where the weak points in our movement are and how to best exploit them. When it’s the case that our organizers and comrades from other organizations in Austin who we support are being arrested and deliberately targeted by the state as well as fascists, this was a serious error that could have served our movement up to the enemy on a silver platter.

Image result for cointelpro

Third, since our orientation as an organization is not toward students as a whole (because the category of students is made up of several classes), we do not seek to serve students, but to serve the working class, a section of which are also students. Universities as capitalist institutions serve to create an ideological and material divide between sections of the people, indoctrinating students with bourgeois propaganda and ideology and offering the opportunity at class ascension into the bourgeoisie or petty bourgeoisie. During their time at the university, even students from working-class backgrounds can very easily become detached from the proletarian experiences that defined their youth and gave them reason to rebel. The universities stand behind an ivory paywall, with the vast majority of the working class kept outside of its gates. Any organization that claims to fight for the proletariat must move toward the destruction of this wall and to the integration of proletarian student interests with the interests of the broad sections of the proletariat outside of the university. Any initiative of the student population, whether it is in the form of glorified bourgeois clinical practices like the RMHP or whether it has an apparently revolutionary character, cannot claim the title of “revolutionary” if its perspective stops at the walls of the university. University activists, especially in Austin, are often rightly accused of being holed up in the safe spaces of the university, unable to connect with the working-class people outside of academia. Those people outside the walls are in reality far more willing to take up the tasks of revolutionaries than the average academic, but their ideas are discounted by the university activists. For campus-focused activists, because the working class doesn’t speak and present themselves how these activists would like them to, or because they aren’t perfectly progressive on every issue, uniting with the people is impossible. Attempting to create solutions for mental health that appeal purely to working-class students gives us a one-sided, subjectivist view on how to seize upon the demands of the working class as a whole. Had we taken into consideration the interests of the entire working class outside of the university and their ideas on how an organization should handle mental health, we would have ended up with an entirely different product. If we had pitched the idea of the RMHP as we’d conceived it to these folks, we would have been rightly met with derisive laughter, because on paper and in practice, the RMHP bred liberalism, a disdain for struggle, and weakness overall. Initiatives that successfully inspire the people and bring them into the class struggle must instead breed discipline and strength, and struggle for transformation, which the working class gravitates toward and desperately needs if it hopes to seize power and win control over their lives.

Naturally, the proletariat is the revolutionary class under capitalism, and all work that we do should be primarily oriented toward their needs. The working class, as an essential part of their existence as the exploited class, experiences vast degrees of cruelty and oppression. Their role in the production process breeds alienation through which they are disconnected from their reality as fundamentally social beings. Given that workers also work for a wage that is only a small portion of the value that they create in the production process, they have limited access to health care in general and especially mental health care. Because of these conditions and many others that ensure their oppression, the working class is made to bear the excruciating pains of mental illness under capitalism. Though mental illness affects the working class to a particularly strong degree, they are not the only class that experiences these troubles. The petty bourgeoisie and members of the bourgeoisie—though they are sometimes well off enough to ignore their dreary existence for significant amounts of time, drowning their alienation in luxurious parties, travel and vacation, and other escapist ventures—also experience this alienation because of the existence of class society. One aspect of what demarcates the working class from the other classes in this field, however, is their ability to access bourgeois mental health services because of both financial and time resources. The petty bourgeoisie and bourgeoisie, though they as a whole are subjected to the mental hardships of capitalism less than the working class is, are able to take money out of their pockets or time out of their days and spend an hour or two every week talking about their mental health. Mental health programs in their bourgeois clinical or group therapy forms, like the RMHP, are oriented far more toward the petty bourgeoisie rather than the proletariat. The working class rarely has any way to avoid remaining face to face with its ongoing mental hardships, and unless their conditions are severe, workers are condemned to either “tough it out” or face starvation and homelessness. We saw this same pattern of inaccessibility based on class for bourgeois mental health services at UT.

The central difference between these classes’ relationship to mental health, however, is the freedom that proletarian individuals find through engaging in violent struggle against the existing social system that exploits them. The bourgeoisie can never have such radical freedom because it would destroy the social basis for their existence as the bourgeoisie. Yet we must underline that we ourselves never overcame this unequal access to mental health care in our programming, since we did not ever progress beyond a fundamentally bourgeois structure for addressing the problem. Only a fundamentally different method, one that seeks transformation through the revolutionary violence that is completely inaccessible to those loyal to the bourgeois order, could truly be accessible and appealing to the working class.

People from the working class, if they have time at all to devote toward their mental health, would never willingly give it to anything like the RMHP that will not help them fight against their debilitating conditions. The working class don’t want to “hug it out” or spend time digging deep into their past to find out which childhood traumas are affecting them today. They want to understand the contradictions as they exist currently and how to destroy them so they can continue to live and fight. These lessons could not be taught with the safe space liberalism promoted by the RMHP. The RMHP adopted and encouraged the worst of bourgeois group therapeutic practices and meshed it with the feel-good liberalism so prominent among the left and especially in academic spaces. In its form as basically group therapy, the RMHP physically isolated us from the class we aim to orient toward; and in essence, in how it dealt with this therapy, as an isolated bubble of confidentiality separated from participants’ realities, the program did not have a working-class orientation. The SPK, in taking up the issue of mental health, had in mind the goal of drawing in and radicalizing the petty-bourgeois student population through their experiences with capitalist alienation. These experiences should be seized upon at a certain point in the development of our movement after we have consolidated the most advanced and seek to win over the intermediate classes like the petty bourgeoisie, who waver between their commitment to the bourgeoisie and to the proletariat. While in our context these petty-bourgeois students are the most numerous population in our university, they are not the section we should orient toward primarily because they do not constitute the most advanced sections of the people. We must always reaffirm our commitment to the working-class students of our university and the broad proletarian youth and workers.

Another crucial error that we made occurred during this step of the mass line was while we were accumulating the ideas of the masses. This crucial error was failing to consider whether mental health was the area of work that would be most effective given the context of our conditions and current stage of development as an organization and movement. A concrete assessment of our conditions—of the movement and sentiments of the people, the movement and progress of the enemy forces, and so on—must be made to determine which set of demands, along with our method for struggling for them, will actually move the people most quickly toward destroying the reactionary forces and capitalism. For instance, in the time that we were operating the RMHP, we knew that fascists the world over were becoming more openly organized and militant. The spreading of fascist propaganda on the UT campus and the horrific events in Charlottesville, along with violent physical confrontations with fascists in Austin over the summer of 2017, made us more than aware of this fact. For some time, fascists have been training in hand-to-hand as well as armed combat. They have been physically training themselves and gathering forces to prepare for a war that we on the left have largely contented ourselves to remain unprepared for. Many on the left have even taken this disgusting pacifism as a virtue, whether through the tired liberalism of non-violence or through the more insidious postmodern attempts at “combating hypermasculinity”, which only reinforce violence and power as inherently masculine qualities and thus throw out the possibility altogether that women should even wield violence in service of destroying patriarchal capitalism. In order to combat the growing reactionary forces, we must build organizations and individuals with the fighting capacity to actually defend our communities from fascist violence. The goal of every initiative and program launched by a revolutionary organization should be for the purpose of recruiting fighters into its ranks and forging them in the fiery furnace of class struggle. Because of this, we must orient our recruitment efforts toward drawing in fighters who are ready to physically and mentally engage in the class struggle and are healthy enough to carry on this fight continuously. There are plenty of people among the masses ready to take up this fight and sacrifice their time, energy, and even lives to destroy the threat of rising fascism and capitalist domination. Orienting recruitment toward those suffering from qualitatively more intense mental illness, a population whose conditions in general serve as barriers to reaching the point of being continuous fighters (we say “in general” because many of the best organizers in the revolutionary movement and our organization also suffer from these conditions) does not accomplish the task of drawing from the most advanced sections of the people. This is especially true when we produce a program that does not at all help people suffering from mental illness to actually wage war on their conditions. In a period when we are still consolidating our forces for the war against capitalism, we must gear ourselves toward bringing in the ready-made fighters and not toward a section of the population who still have many barriers still to overcome to participate at the same level and intensity as the former group. We should be clear that we affirm that those who suffer from the oppression of mental illness have an immense capacity to be transformed into the most fierce and dedicated organizers; their oppression, like all who experience it, breeds a desire for resistance, and for the strength to carry out that resistance with. We do not discount the importance of continuing the effort to improve our understanding of mental health as revolutionaries so we can make ourselves into increasingly strong organizers and so that we can better serve the people by dealing with mental illness in a truly revolutionary way. And we also affirm that it is exactly through making this prioritization that we can most quickly produce a strong revolutionary movement that can seize power and begin to fully serve those facing qualitatively more intense mental illness and most quickly begin to find actual answers to their difficulties, rather than simply reproducing the same bourgeois methods that fail them.

Though by this point it may be obvious, but it deserves attention nonetheless, that our next major error was in a misapplication, or straight up non-application, of the second step of the mass line. This step tells us that after gathering the ideas of the masses, we must concentrate these ideas from their scattered and unsystematic state and develop them into a political line, campaign, or initiative that is capable of advancing class struggle. In the course of developing the RMHP, we never actually carried out this step, though we believed we did. Rather than synthesizing the ideas of the people, in the raw form of the student-led mental health support group, and molding it into a new form of proletarian struggle for mental health, we opted to simply take the methods as they were suggested and tack on the words “revolutionary.” We never really progressed past the first step of the mass line; we simply took one of the existing ideas we had gathered, did not meaningfully change it, and spread it as-is. Since the mass line is primarily a method of leadership, this error in the mass line is known as a “right deviation”—simply following the demands and methods of the people as they are rather than acting as the leading edge that guides the working class to cut forward through history with a scientific understanding of how to overthrow capitalism. We supposed that by having a “revolutionary” mental health program guided by a revolutionary organization that maybe sometimes would talk about how capitalism informs the contradictions of our mental health, that this represented a qualitative advancement of the ideas from their unsystematic state to their consolidated, scientific state. In retrospect, this was a laughably naive and juvenile error, reflecting a butter-handed grasp of the mass line and of how to actually apply revolutionary theory on the ground. A correct application of this second step will give us the correct way to carry out and achieve the demands of the people (which, again, will be qualitatively different from the bourgeois forms the RMHP emulated). An incorrect application, or non-application, will lead us into the perilous pit of liberalism that constituted the actual practices of the Open and Closed Sessions of the RMHP.

On that point, the exercises and techniques used for the RMHP sessions were purely interpersonal and devoid of any contextualization within politics. While these exercises created a space for participants to “get things off their chest” and often felt cathartic for those involved, we cannot say that they effectively did much else. They provided no way forward out of the mire of mental health issues and offered only temporary comfort—and what’s more, by dispelling frustrations harmlessly rather than scientifically organizing the people’s pain and anger into a weapon, they actually stabilized the ruling-class order. As an organization, it is a necessity for us to bring in and unite all individuals who can be united with. However, principled unity does not come through simply understanding each other and forging deeper personal ties. Principled unity on a personal level, but more importantly on a political level, comes only through struggle. We know that we cannot transform ourselves by remaining comfortable with the way things stand. Growth is achieved through struggle, and struggle is inevitably uncomfortable. The program even built liberalism into its very structure by adopting things like anonymous feedback and criticism forms, when it is clear that for revolutionaries, all criticisms should be made openly and directly. Additionally, we also adopted a strict policy of confidentiality in group sessions, knowing that this policy was standard in traditional bourgeois support groups and would create a more comfortable environment for participants to open up to others. This may seem like a basic principle of mental health groups, but in reality, this only contributes to the liberalism and disconnect between the daily life and problems of participants and the practices of group sessions. This sort of policy leaves little room for people to be supported and encouraged to struggle and overcome their problems outside of these confidential safe spaces. It instead produces situations where the only work that could be done is in the groups themselves.

The technique of dialectical behavior therapy (DBT), which informed many of the methods of the RMHP, seeks to promote mindfulness, interpersonal effectiveness, distress tolerance, and emotional regulation. In our mangled variation of DBT, we placed nearly all of our emphasis on mindfulness and interpersonal effectiveness, while neglecting distress tolerance and emotion regulation. This reflects our tendency to both uncritically adopt bourgeois therapeutic measures as well as to prioritize the aspects of those measures that promote comfort and uncritical affirmation at all times, as opposed to transformation through difficult and uncomfortable struggle with ourselves. It taught participants to shy away from discomfort and reject struggle entirely, creating little more than a “safe space” for us to share our problems and find temporary relief from our daily lives. Simply helping each other feel better, even while doing it in a context where we are able to explore the effects of capitalism on our mental health, is not a transformative or revolutionary act. The RMHP, like all bourgeois mental health, essentially served as a means for those of us seeking help with our mental health to become more comfortable with our unhealthy conditions. It taught participants to find coping mechanisms for life under capitalism, but not how to prepare ourselves for the battles that lie before us that we must fight in order to truly cure ourselves. As a whole, these methods of mental health care, though they can be helpful for some, serve to smooth over the contradictions between capitalism and the working class, and not sharpen them. This is no different from the work of nonprofits and NGOs, only in this case it was led by a revolutionary organization. In essence, the program was what we can refer to as a “red charity”—a revolutionary program in name only, and not in practice.

We believe that while we can temporarily relieve some of the pain that life under capitalism brings through support and solidarity, there will never be truly healthy individuals under capitalism. We will never free ourselves from alienation until our societies are built around the needs of the working class. The healthiest that one can be under capitalism is becoming a revolutionary partisan in the class war—by harnessing the agency we find in the violent struggle to destroy the systems that make us unhealthy. It is only through this process that we are able to find purpose, reaffirm our dignity, and combat the feelings of helplessness and self-loathing that accompany nearly every mental illness.

There is no greater service to the people than equipping them with the tools necessary to once and for all do away with capitalism and organizing them into a revolutionary force capable of taking power for themselves and for all oppressed and exploited people. In order to transform ourselves into revolutionaries in service of the working class, we must go through arduous struggle to rupture with the self-serving interests that capitalism and university student life promote, and dedicate ourselves fully to revolution. We must struggle against the lack of discipline and self-destructive coping mechanisms that so many of us have come to rely on to ease the pain we suffer due to exploitation and oppression under capitalism. The RMHP did nothing to teach participants how to struggle against our illnesses and the conditions that produce them; it did nothing to build healthy coping mechanisms, discipline to fight against our unhealthy coping mechanisms, and a clear vision of how to move forward with the destruction of capitalism.

The mental health of our comrades and the masses should never be taken for granted, and we must find ways to truly meet their needs. However, our understanding of the contradictions underlying mental illness tells us that they cannot be overcome through programs such as the RMHP. Because of our methods and errors, the fight for revolutionary mental health did not prove to be the fruitful endeavor we thought it would be, although we have arrived at a much greater understanding at this point of the sort of work that must be done to fulfill these needs. We do not wish to discount the pain that those of us struggling with our mental health experience as a result of this wretched system, but the people deserve better than what we have tried to give them. We will apply the lessons we have learned to continue combating mental illness within our own organization.

Standing Up, Standing Tall

We are grateful to all those who put their trust in us by taking part in this initiative, and to those who helped us in its development and the many comrades who have offered us the criticisms necessary to help us see our errors. We also realize the politics of a “revolutionary” program cannot be divorced from the politics of the entire organization. Productivism within the RMHP speaks to productivism within RSF; rightism and liberalism within the RMHP speak to rightism and liberalism within RSF.

We recognize that in RSF’s existence, there are essentially two clearly demarcated periods. The first was our first semester as an organization, composed of militant antifascism that enabled us to pack rooms with people eager to get involved. This represented the necessary building of forces for war against the enemies of the people that are growing stronger daily. The second period was our second and third semesters, which were almost entirely watered down by our focus on developing the RMHP and sorting out its aftermath. This period represented the desire for “peaceful coexistence” with the enemies of the people, attempting to develop and grow our cause without making attacks on the organizations and institutions that serve as enemies to the interests of the proletarian revolution. The release of this summation reflects our commitment to once again wave the red flag and go on the offensive against all these enemies of the people.


We have said multiple times throughout this paper that the goal of a revolutionary organization must be to prepare its organizers and the people for an all-out, actual war against capitalism. Our organization will serve as a training school for revolutionary war, and the only way we can learn how to make war is by making war. We will never learn to carry out war on the massive scale that will be required by a revolutionary guerrilla war unless we constantly prepare ourselves on the path to that point by carrying out militant action, propaganda, and battles on smaller scales. This is what differentiates revolutionaries from the cowardly “socialists” who have a historically ignorant view of the building of the Bolshevik Party and the Russian Revolution that drives them to put off militant confrontation with the enemies of the people until their forces reach a certain breaking point where they can storm the Winter Palace with hardly a shot fired. Because our forces can only be built through the militant, violent struggle against the enemies of our class, we know that these fretful cowards will never reach that point. Making war will prepare us for the war to come, rally around us and bring into our ranks those who realize the necessity of violence to achieve a classless society free from exploitation, and unmask the real enemies of the people. We reaffirm our commitment to the principle of revolutionary violence that is necessary to confront the enemies of the people—the university administration and its bureaucrats, the reactionary bourgeois students, the abusers and rapists, the fascists both on and off of our campus, the NGO bloodsuckers, and the phony “revolutionaries” whose book worship and tepid denunciation of the capitalist system drain the rebellious fervor from the people who are unfortunately drawn into their circles. This summation marks our return to our revolutionary roots and expresses our desire to take up violent struggle in service of the people. Peaceful coexistence with capitalism is an impossibility for revolutionaries; peaceful coexistence with capitalism and its auxiliaries means violence against the people. The actions to come in the following year will draw clear lines in the sand between revolutionaries and counterrevolutionaries. We will make no apologies for the necessary violence of our struggle and will spare no sacrifice for the battles to come because we are revolutionaries committed to the overthrow of capitalism and the establishment of a classless society. We live for the people, we fight for the people, and we die for the people. This is what it means to be a revolutionary and this is what we uphold from this point until the final dying breath of capitalism.




Revolutionary Student Front—Austin


RSF’s Revolutionary Library Catalog


The Revolutionary Student Front realizes the importance of reading, study, and theoretical knowledge in informing us on how to properly carry out our organizing. We know that without revolutionary theory, there can be no revolutionary movement. Similarly, without any revolutionary practice, we can’t develop any revolutionary theory to guide us further along the path. Since we believe that the masses themselves are the makers of history, it’s our duty to arm them with a scientific knowledge of history, philosophy, economics, and organizing methods that have been proven to carry the people forward into a new stage of history. Particularly with the advent of the Internet, there is no good reason that people should be deprived of the knowledge necessary for their liberation, nor should they have to pay for access to it. Our Revolutionary Library is a start at collecting physical copies of reading material, as well as online sources, to distribute and lend out to students of revolution.

Each work listed will have a hyperlink to its online version, a link to an audiobook version if available, a short description of the contents of the text, and a notation on its availability in either book or printed form. All books are free to borrow (and printed/zine versions are free to own), but you may also purchase any book from us at near-cost. If you wish to borrow or purchase any physical text from the library, contact a member of RSF or get in touch with us at!

This catalog is still a work in progress, as it takes a significant amount of time and money to compile all of the works we want and add the necessary descriptions to each available title. Please send us suggestions on material you would like to see in this library!


Basics of Revolutionary Communism

“The Principles of Communism” – Friedrich Engels

This work is Engel’s basic description of the historical distinction between the proletariat and all other oppressed masses of history, and offers his ideas on how the nature of revolution must and would inevitably play out.

Available in book form. $6 for purchase.


From Marx to Mao: A Study in Revolutionary Dialectics – George Thomson

This is a Marxist study of the Russian Revolution of 1917 and the Chinese Revolution of 1949, designed to demonstrate their unity and continuity as two successive stages in the world socialist revolution. Their common theoretical foundation is expounded by means of extensive quotations from the Marxist classics, especially the writings of Lenin and Mao Tse-tung. These enable the reader to follow the two revolutions through the minds of those who led them, and at the same time they provide him with an introduction to the basic principles of dialectical and historical materialism; for that theory can only be understood in the light of the revolutionary struggles out of which it has grown and in which it finds its fullest and clearest expression.

Available in book form. $25 for purchase.


“The Communist Manifesto” – Karl Marx & Friedrich Engels 

The Communist Manifesto is one of the world’s most influential political tracts. Commissioned by the Communist League and written by communist theorists Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, it laid out the League’s purposes and program. The Manifesto suggested a course of action for a proletarian (working class) revolution to overthrow the ruling class of bourgeoisie and to eventually bring about a classless society. Though the writing style can be antiquated for modern readers, it remains a classic to this day.



Available in book form. $5 for purchase

The Science of Revolution – Lenny Wolff

Oppression breeds resistance. This is a fundamental idea and can be seen as a foundation set by reality, but Lenny Wolff adequately argues that such alone isn’t enough to breed fundamental change, and that Marxism holds the necessary components to direct such a change.

Available in book and zine form. $10 to purchase, free for zine.


“What Maoism has to offer the world” – Jiminykrix

Available in zine form. Free.


“Marxism-Leninism-Maoism Study Notes” – Communist Party of India (Maoist)

Available online only. Available in printed form upon request.


Quotations from Chairman Mao Zedong

Available in book form. $5 to purchase.


Revolutionary Organizing

Five Golden Rays – Mao Zedong

Five Golden Rays is a collection of works that detail practices to help comrades and organizations develop what is takes to transform oneself and one’s outlook to correspond with the tasks of being a proletarian revolutionary who works for the liberation of all working people.

Available in book form. $5 to purchase.


Constructive Criticism: A Handbook – Gracie Lyons

Available in book form. $10 to purchase.


The Mass Line and the American Revolutionary Movement – Scott Harrison

Only available online. Printed version available upon request.


Mass Work – Communist Party of the Philippines

Only available online. Printed version available upon request.


General Political Line of the Communist Party of Peru

Available in book form. $10 to purchase.



Understanding History Scientifically

The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the StateFriedrich Engels

Available in book form. $5 to purchase.


The German IdeologyFriedrich Engels and Karl Marx

Available in book form. $5 to purchase.


Socialism: Utopian and Scientific – Friedrich Engels

Available in book form. $5 to purchase.


The State and Revolution – Vladimir Lenin



Available in book form. $5 to purchase.


The Communist Necessity – John Moufawad-Paul

Available in book form. $10 to purchase.



U.S. History


A People’s History of the United States – Howard Zinn

Available in book form. $6 to purchase.


An Indigenous People’s History of the United States – Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz

Available in book form. $13 to purchase.


Killing Hope: US Military & CIA Interventions Since World War II – William Blum

Available in book form. $10 to purchase.




Revolution in China

“Red Star Over China” – Edgar Snow



Available in book form. $7 to purchase.


“Wind in the Tower: Mao Tsetung & The Chinese Revolution 1949-1975” – Han Suyin

Available in book form. $5 to purchase.


“Fanshen: A Documentary of Revolution in a Chinese Village” – William Hinton

Available in book form. $5 to purchase.



The Battle for China’s Past: Mao and the Cultural Revolution – Mobo Gao


Available in book form. $20 to purchase.

Selected Works of Mao Zedong Vol. 1 – Mao Zedong

Available in book form. $5 to purchase.



A Basic Understanding of the Communist Party of China

Available in book form. $10 to purchase.


Evaluating the Cultural Revolution in China and its Legacy for the Future – MLM Study Group (US)

Available online only. Can be printed on request.




Revolution in the USSR


The Bolshevik Revolution Vol. 2 (1917-1923) – E.H. Carr

Available in book form. $5 to purchase.


History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolshevik) – Joseph Stalin

Available in book form. $20 to purchase.


Class Struggle in the USSR: First Period (1917-1923) – Charles Bettelheim

Available in book form. $10 to purchase.

Class Struggles in the USSR: Second Period (1923-1930) – Charles Bettelheim

Available in book form. $12 to purchase.

Mao’s Evaluations of Stalin – Scott Harrison

Available online only. Can be printed upon request.

How the Soviet Revisionists Carry out All Around Restoration of Capitalism in the USSR


Currently available online only.



Revolutionary Philosophy

On Practice – Mao Zedong

Available in book form in Selected Works of Mao Zedong Vol. 1


On Contradiction – Mao Zedong

Available in book form in Selected Works of Mao Zedong Vol. 1


Continuity and Rupture – John Moufawad-Paul

Available in book form. $15 to purchase.




Political Economy

Wage Labor & Capital – Karl Marx

Available in book form. $5 to purchase.


Karl Marx – Value, Price, & Profit – Karl Marx

Available in book form. $5 to purchase.


Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism – Vladimir Lenin

Available in book form. $5 to purchase.


Capital Volume 1 – Karl Marx

Available in book form. $10 to purchase.


Grundrisse – Karl Marx

Available in book form. $10 to purchase.



Proletarian Feminism

Philosophical Trends in the Feminist Movement

Written by Anuradha Ghandy, an Indian Marxist feminist, this book outlines the variety of developments within feminist thought around the world through Marxist analysis, and gives the necessary critiques to many of these trends in a great contribution to the development the body of work which is still in creation – proletarian feminism.

Available in book form. $5 to purchase.


Caliban and the Witch: Women, the Body, and Primitive Accumulation – Silvia Federici 

Available in book form. $15 to purchase.


Patriarchy and Accumulation on a World Scale – Maria Mies

Available in book form. $5 to purchase.


Marxism, Mariategui and the Women’s Movement – Catalina Adrianzen

Available in zine form. Free.


Women, Race and Class – Angela Davis

Available in book form. $8 to purchase.




It Will Not Fall Unless You Hit It – Red Guards Austin

Available in zine form. Free.


Throwing Light – Red Guards Austin

Only available online. Can be printed upon request.

The Fascist Offensive and the Tasks of the Communist International in the Struggle of the Working Class against Fascism – Georgi Dimitrov

Available in book form. $8 to purchase.


A Brief History and Assessment of Antifa Organizing – Revolutionary Communist Party of Canada

Only available online. Can be printed upon request.


Emergent Fascism and the Fragmented Left – Revolutionary Communist Party of Canada

Only available online. Can be printed upon request.



National Liberation

On the Questions of Race and Racism: Revolutionary National Liberation and Building the United Front Against Imperialism – Kevin “Rashid” Johnson

Only available online. Can be printed on request.


Black Liberation in the 21st Century: A Revolutionary Reassessment of Black Nationalism – Kevin “Rashid” Johnson

Only available online. Can be printed on request.


The Struggle for Chicano Liberation – League of Revolutionary Struggle (ML)

Only available online. Can be printed on request.


The Struggle for National Liberation of Indigenous Peoples is Central to the Revolution – Revolutionary Communist Party of Canada

Only available online. Can be printed on request.



Marxism and the National Question – Joseph Stalin

Available in book form. $7 to purchase.


The Wretched of the Earth – Frantz Fanon

Available in book form. $6 to purchase.


Black Skin, White Masks – Frantz Fanon

Available in book form. $10 to purchase.


Black Like Mao – Robin Kelley & Betsy Esch

Available in zine form. Free.


The Black Panther Party

Black Against Empire – Joshua Bloom

.epub link

.mobi link

Available in book form. $10 to purchase.


Revolutionary Suicide – Huey P. Newton

Available in book form. $10 to purchase.


Assata: An Autobiography – Assata Shakur

Available in book form. $10 to purchase.

The New Communist Movement and Maoism in the US

Heavy Radicals: The FBI’s Secret War on America’s Maoists – Aaron Leonard & Conor Gallagher

Available in book form. $15 to purchase.


Condemned to Win – Position Paper from Red Guards Austin

Available in zine form. Free.


Red Guards Austin – A Year Summation of the Life of a Militant Maoist Organization in the U.S. Central South

Available in zine form. Free.

Announcement of the Revolutionary Mental Health Program

“Our cadres must show concern for every soldier, and all people in the revolutionary ranks must care for each other, must love and help each other.”

– Mao Zedong, “Serve the People”

In an attempt to determine a starting point from which real revolutionary organizing could take place at UT Austin, we spent our first months as an organization investigating and analyzing many of the problems that students faced on our campus. After a number of interactions with fellow students, it became apparent to us that the university’s existing healthcare structures were failing to meet the mental health needs of our fellow students. The personal experiences of a number of our members further affirmed this fact.

As a revolutionary organization, RSF holds that our role is not to simply make demands from the University, an institution that we know cares only about profits and not its students. Rather, we must build alternative institutions that are run by and for students themselves.

As such, we are officially announcing the launch of our Revolutionary Mental Health Program. The RMHP’s aims are to lend emotional and social support to its participants and to offer a political understanding of mental health and its relationship to capitalism. Because the program is still in an embryonic stage, we are calling for the help of those with experience in the mental health industry to assist in its growth and development. In addition to describing the program itself and the process by which we deemed it necessary, this document outlines a preliminary theoretical understanding of the relationships between capitalism, alienation, and illness. These relationships are too complex to describe in a document as brief as this one, as they are also mediated by structures like heteropatriarchy and white supremacy. We hope to explore these more complicated interactions in depth in future documents.

The RMHP program

Though we are not ourselves licensed psychiatrists or therapists, we understand that capitalism has not, does not, and will never create whole and healthy people. Thus, lending social and emotional support to our comrades and to our fellow students is a central aspect of a successful fight against mental illness and against capitalism.

The RMHP hopes to provide a group environment in which participants feel validated, safe, and supported within a community of people that understands or is committed to understanding the problems that they face in their everyday lives. By providing participants with a consistent and supportive community of comrades who care deeply about one another, we hope to combat the alienation that we students face as a result of being at a university as enormous as UT.

Additionally, we aim to further the political understanding of the our fellow students by tackling the question of why there exists so little emotional connection in a society full of so much wealth. Exploring this question will necessary lead us to the conclusion that we must organize, and organize along explicitly anti-capitalist lines, to bring an end to this system.

Overall, RSF’s Revolutionary Mental Health Program hopes to serve as a base of student power that can address the immediate social and emotional needs of our fellow needs and offer a revolutionary understanding of society. In so doing, we hope to help create healthier individuals and stronger organizers who can continue to build bases of student power in other aspects of student life.

That said, this program is still in its very beginning stages, limited to small trial groups that we are administering and participating in with the aim of arriving at a better grasp of how to undertake this endeavor. We are currently working with several graduate students with experience in social work, therapy, and psychology, who are guiding our group sessions and ensuring that they work smoothly. However, while an overwhelming amount of people have expressed interest in participating and leading the program, we currently lack the resources with which to accommodate such a large demand.

This being the case, we are calling for all who know how to facilitate or are interested in learning to facilitate group therapy sessions to reach out to us in order to develop the program such that we’re able to serve an increasingly large section of our student body. Our Revolutionary Mental Health Program has a lot of room to grow, but we hope that it forms one of the many bases of student power necessary to make the University of Texas into a people’s university.

The mass line and conditions of UT


At the heart of the way that the Revolutionary Student Front works is a method of organizing called the “mass line,” which may be summed up by the slogan of “from the people, to the people.” The mass line guides what kind of work a revolutionary group carries out and how they do it. It states that revolutionary organizers must develop solutions to the social problems that oppressed communities themselves express concerns about, and base these solutions on the ideas that these communities themselves devise. The mass line protects against missionary forms of organizing, in which organizers impose solutions to the problems that they subjectively deem most pressing.

However, because we are revolutionaries and our goal is to win people over to a revolutionary perspective, we must go beyond simple charity work. In addition to meeting people’s needs, our methods of addressing these social problems must do so in a way that offers a more clear political understanding of these needs and why they remain unmet within this system. Creating a program or campaign that can achieve both of these goals is necessary for advancing revolution, for working this way ensures that we are making revolutionary theory relevant to people’s everyday lives. Revolutionary organizers aim to develop programs that the community that they serve may take up as its own. If the proposed program fails to gain traction, organizers must go back to the drawing board and discard any unnecessary aspects as needed. Should the program truly meet the needs of the people and succeed, it will form a new basis of community power and autonomy, functioning as a spark for the development of other types of grassroots institutions.

Keeping the method of the mass line at the forefront of our practice, we began conducting our social investigation in the fall of 2016. We tabled, held town halls and conducted regular meetings in order to talk to fellow students about the problems that they faced in their daily lives. We saw many recurring themes in our conversations with fellow students, including the issues of tuition increases, the increasing cost of student housing, lack of transportation services for commuting students, and finally, a notable lack in the quality, availability, and depth of UT’s mental health and counseling services. Many of the folks that we spoke to said that they had experienced absurdly long wait times, dismissive therapists and counselors, and services that, at best, worked to solve problems only superficially. Furthermore, for students whose conditions necessitated extensive time in counseling, the cost of mental health care — beyond the handful of free sessions that the CMHC offers students — prevented them from continuing their treatment.

According the Center for Disease Control, in 2014, suicide was the second leading cause of death among people in the 10-14, 15-24, and 25-34 age groups. Lack of public resources, social stability, and funding drives thousands of youths to suicide each year, and afflicts millions more. According to UT’s Center for Mental Health and Counseling, 18 percent of undergraduate students have seriously considered suicide during their time at college, and 8 percent of undergraduate students have attempted suicide. The fact that nearly one in every ten students at UT has attempted suicide speaks volumes about the dismal state of our mental health resources here on campus. The rising rate of people of all age groups suffering from mental illnesses also sheds light on an uncomfortable truth about life under capitalism. In order to build a world free from mental illness and social isolation, we must understand how capitalism produces these disconcerting ways of life.

Capitalism, alienation, and illness


As humans, we are social beings that live in a social world that is produced by our labor in relationships with other people. It follows that the nature of these relationships are conditioned by a dominant social structure and the social relations that this structure necessitates. In order to understand the conditions from which mental illness arises, we must examine the way that capitalism as a political, economic, and social system structures our interactions with one another. To do so, we must take a look into the way that we create the goods that fulfill human needs in a capitalist system.

Capitalist society is divided into two primary classes: the worker, who has nothing to sell but their ability to work, and the capitalist, who owns the tools or instruments necessary for the production of a good. While the worker relies on their ability to work for survival, the capitalist depends on the worker’s labor for the production of goods, the profit of which allows the capitalist to expand their enterprise. The market, which requires competition between capitalists, forces individual capitalists to engage in a constant process of expansion and accumulation.

Despite the fact that the worker performs the labor necessary to produce goods, the capitalist’s ownership over the instruments necessary to make those goods allows the capitalist to claim legal ownership over them at the end of the production process. The worker is then given a wage in exchange for their labor. This wage, however, is not representative of the value of the product that the worker creates with their labor; rather, it is constricted such that it covers only the monetary value necessary for workers to keep coming back to work. That is, the capitalist pays the worker only enough money to cover food, housing, a limited amount of education, etc. This is how the capitalist makes a profit.

As such, while the relationship between the worker and the capitalist appears on the surface as a voluntary exchange, the relationship between capitalists and workers is fundamentally exploitative. The worker is forced to participate as a merely mechanical cog in a production process that is not of their choosing, in order to produce a commodity that they don’t own, for profit that they do not have access to. The entire process of production takes the appearance of decisions made by a force entirely foreign and alien to the workers, disconnecting them from their own essence as creative and free human beings. Additionally, since workers are not producing for the real needs of other human beings, but for the need of the capitalist to accumulate profits, they are alienated from realizing themselves as part of a complex, cooperative social system where their work provides for others and the work of others provide for them.This set of conditions is what Marx calls alienation.

The relationships between capitalist and worker, and between worker the production process, lead to a generalized condition in which workers produce only to survive, and survive only to produce. These relationships, which we are forced to participate in in order to survive, structures our relationships with other people, be it with the capitalist that forces us into this relationship, or with our fellow workers, with whom we must compete with in our struggle for survival. Capitalism, then, necessitates a culture of hyper-individualism and an atomistic relationship to the world around us. Its requirement for the profit that we create negates our needs for a whole and healthy life, for meaningful and productive relationships with the people around us.

It’s no wonder, then, that our society is rife with depression, anxiety, and various other mental health disorders.

Mental illness, deprivation, and categorization


In addition to this basis of alienation, capitalism leaves workers with the bare minimum, if even that, to survive on. Marx notes in “Wage Labor and Capital” that “the price paid for labor is equal to the amount of labor needed to (1) keep the laborer alive, (2) train the laborer, and (3) create new laborers, that is, support the worker’s family so more workers can be created.” Nothing more. So contrary to what people will say, capitalism is not a meritocracy where people are paid according to their contribution, but are paid only enough to keep themselves barely alive and functioning. But as we know, capitalism is often unable to provide us with a “livable wage”, leaving nearly 20 million people to die from hunger and preventable illness every year. For those who do manage to survive, life is a constant economic conflict. The meager wages that we are forced accept in exchange for our labor is rarely enough to pay for housing, to pay for the enormous cost of healthcare, and to keep up with student loan payments. Simply living our day-to-day lives is a heavy economic burden that our wages are only seldom able to pay for.

Consequently, working-class students and working-class people live in a constant state of economic precarity, often fueling feelings of hopelessness and despair. In addition to these conditions, the narrative of the “American dream” fuels the idea of a non-existent “meritocracy” — that if you work hard enough, you can become rich beyond your wildest dreams. As a result, those that struggle to make ends meet on a regular basis are encouraged to think of themselves as failures and of their problems as a result of their own faults. This ideology prompts working-class people to look inwardly for a cause of their suffering, instead of looking outwardly at the society that not only allows for their misery, but depends on it.

The only cure for abjection in a capitalist system is to sell one’s labor to whomever will buy it. Capitalism has never, does not, and will never view the workers upon which it depends as anything but sources of potential profit.

Furthermore, the degree to which society categorizes, stigmatizes, and deems mental health disorders “illnesses” to begin with depends on the degree to which the individuals who live with these disorders are capable of generating profit. The more a given mental health disorder prevents a person from engaging in production for profit, the more seriously the disorder is stigmatized and treated as a serious affliction. For example, Narcissistic Personality Disorder — a serious condition that often causes serious harm to those afflicted with it and their loved ones — runs rampant among corporate CEOs, who habitually disregard the needs of their workers in the name of personal gain and profit. In fact, it has been proven that corporate CEOs with narcissistic personalities actually make higher profits than their non-narcissistic counterparts. As a result, despite the detrimental effects that NPD wreaks upon one’s interpersonal relationships, its ability to encourage competitive and profitable activity renders it a disorder unworthy of research funding. Finding a solution to NPD is deemed unimportant and not a priority.

By contrast, because depression often leads to high employee turnover and poor performance in the workplace, depression is stigmatized as a condition that requires an immediate solution. Hence physicians’ willingness to prescribe pharmaceuticals for the sake of resolving these issues as soon as possible, providing a superficial and individualized solution to a problem that is structured and determined by society writ large. If a disorder renders workers unable to make it to the workplace to make profit for the capitalists that buy and depend on their labor, its treatment is considered an immediate priority.

Capitalism forces workers into conditions that render mental illness almost inevitable ,while also creating the paradigm through which mental illnesses are perceived, treated, and accepted as illnesses at all.

We do not, of course, attribute every form of mental illness to capitalism or to capitalist socialist relations. While several forms of mental illness stem from actual physiological imbalances, the capitalist social relations that structure our lives force those who deal with such imbalances into impossible conditions. In addition to the alienation, the depravity, and the stigma that capitalism wreaks upon the lives of those with genuine physiological imbalances, those who suffer from such disorders must also deal with an economic system that refuses to offer them treatment unless they are capable of paying enormous medical fees. If a pill can’t fix it, then only outrageous amounts of money will.

Breaking the chains and turning illness into a weapon


Of course, it’s not enough to accept these conditions as a matter of fact. It’s not enough to come to the conclusion that capitalism creates emotional and social deprivation. It is the responsibility of those that are oppressed by this system and understand its conditions to use revolutionary theory and to engage in revolutionary organizing in order to change these conditions. In order to destroy this deceased system, those who realize that another world is possible and necessary must act to make that world a reality.

This situation, however, presents its own particular contradiction: How can organizers go out create institutions of people power if they themselves are downtrodden by these alienating and oppressive conditions? In order to solve this contradiction as part of the broader political struggle against capitalism, it’s necessary to fight against the oppressive conditions of mental health under capitalism. We can only build a world without social alienation by propagating revolution, and we cannot propagate revolution without actively overcoming the oppressive mental health conditions that we are faced with.

Our use of the mass line and our understanding of mental health struggles under capitalism lead us to the conclusion that we must form our own solution to this problem. Though we clearly think that UT’s Center for Mental Health Services ought to have more counselors, more therapists, shorter wait times, and a wider range of programs at its disposal, we also know that we cannot depend on these structures of power to meet our needs. As part of the capitalist system, UT’s administration will always place the prospect of profit before the needs of its students and its workers no matter how much we petition or plead.

While we hope to pressure the University to provide more resources for students struggling with their mental health, the primary aspect of the RMHP lies in building an institution that works on a basis that is fundamentally different from that of the University – on that of the needs of people and not of profit. RSF is looking forward to what the RMHP can bring for our fellow students and for the revolutionary movement at UT, and hopes that, with the participation of our fellow students, we may advance our understanding of how to create a better campus and a better world.

Build the RMHP, build student power, build revolution!

Revolutionary Student Front – Austin

May Day 2017 – Fight ICE with FIRE!

image1On May 1, International Worker’s Day, we ask our fellow students to gather in downtown Austin at the intersection of 4th and Guadalupe Street at 6:00 PM as we protest the exploitative conditions enforced by this country, the city of Austin and the University of Texas against workers, undocumented people, and the people of oppressed nations at home and abroad, as in Syria. Building a better world for the people means nothing short of revolutionary action in organizing both on and off the streets. People power finds its most clear expression through the militant anger that people bring to these actions and can serve to embolden future organizing as well as demonstrate to the powers that be what the consequences of their failure to act will result in. This May Day, we hope to boldly show the city of Austin and our university that we demand protection for undocumented people and action against white supremacist organizing in addition to highlighting the role that UT plays in pushing forward the interests of US imperialism.

President Fenves said previously that UT has no legal authority to become a sanctuary campus, and cited his support of DACA as proof that he has the interests of undocumented students in mind. But we know from the example of our city government that UT does not lack the authority – they’re just scared of losing state funding like Austin did after becoming a sanctuary city. UT continues to prioritize growth and profits over its students that are in actual danger. Any student can see that these priorities are fucked up as, most recently, more of our parking is slated for removal so that a new arena can be built. As a result more students have to park further away from campus for the sake of UT’s profits. Regularly across campus essential resources are taken from us to make the campus shiny, enticing, and profitable. UT is terrified to lose funding that students rarely, if ever, benefit from in the first place.

Fenves’s fake ass solidarity through bare minimum support of DACA is already insulting, to say the least, but he does not stop there. At the infamous February town hall hosted by Fenves and three other UT administrators, he was directly asked why Confederate monuments remain on campus. In an effort to score brownie points with those who had asked for its removal, he made sure to remind us that he aided in the taking down of a single statue before saying all the other racist statues were, for some reason, “part of the fabric of our campus.” This was met with shouts of anger from students, but he still has not taken back his statement. Later on, he was given the name of a confirmed white supremacist student and still failed to investigate the evidence. He is unapologetic for the ways he upholds the legacy of white supremacy that saturates campus and permits the racism of the students that attend UT.

UT has always been a safe space for racist white students, where they’re allowed to develop fascist ideologies with no pushback. Professors encourage abhorrent ideas to flow freely for the sake of debate, while racist, imperialist, and Confederate legacies are upheld and praised constantly. With the election and inauguration of Trump, campus racists have been emboldened, posting up propaganda from white nationalist groups like Identity Evropa and American Vanguard. They have explicitly encouraged reporting undocumented students and praised the Muslim ban. They recognize that UT is a ripe breeding ground for their fascist ideology, despite their overall pathetic attempts to organize sympathetic students.

We must also keep in mind that not only does UT not object to the open support of these awful ideologies, but is substantially and materially invested in imperialism and the class conditions that allow these ideas to flourish. Across campus the US military is uncritically praised and its acceptance is pushed onto students. In fact, UT is the second most militarized in the nation, and the consequences permeate every aspect of campus life, from our war criminal Chancellor to flashy, expensive advertising for every military speaker that comes to campus. Many schools are explicitly or implicitly invested in teaching students to become new pawns of the US war machine. Multiple Arab students report being told or suggested that their language programs weren’t really for them, and that they should prioritize teaching other students Arabic so they can become translators for the military or CIA. Further examples of the US military’s handle on UT can be found at UT’s motivation, again, is money – in 2000 alone the Department of Defense gave over $73 million to fund pro military programs at UT. Despite administrators’ mild disapproval of Trump, the support for the military he now commands has sustained.

Meanwhile, Trump has continued bombing Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan, Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan, and has begun bombing Syria under the guise of “humanitarian aid.” We aren’t fooled by this, just as we weren’t fooled by his claims of focusing on America first and keeping out of other countries. International students, at risk due to the Muslim ban and these bombings, are being encouraged to remain in the US over breaks, to not risk refusal to re-enter. UT has no better response but to insist students should sacrifice home and family for their education in the US.

These are unacceptable conditions for students to live in. Undocumented, international, and immigrant students, along with all students of color, have been put in danger and often severely harmed by UT’s vested interest in imperialism, defense of its racist past, and refusal to investigate and punish racist students. Additionally, working class students continue to face the rising pressures of tuition, rent, campus accessibility, and the abysmal conditions of basic resources that universities should provide. RSF has, from its inception, set out to confront these conditions and to create real student power that can put lasting change into effect. We seek to stand in solidarity with each other as students and the working class on May Day. These issues cannot be solved with petitions, demands, or appeals to the humanity of our oppressors and their institutions – instead we must organize ourselves into a force to be reckoned with. Let’s show Austin our dedication and militancy this May Day by taking to the streets and spreading a message of solidarity with the working class and against all forces that seek to harm them!