From an interview with Mike Tyson, in Maxim magazine, July 2001:

"The other day I saw a show on Court TV. There was this kid who got convicted of murder. A skinny Caucasian guy. He got 20 years, and he thought this was a good deal. He had no idea -- his life is over!  They're gonna fuck him. I said to myself, They're watching this right now, and their mouths are watering!" He puts his head in his hands and screams so loud, the cups on the table rattle. "Owwww!"

From Chapter 7 of Violence by James Gilligan, M.D., a psychiatrist:

I first gained some acquaintance with the reality of rape in prison, and of the means through which some inmates are forced into the role of sex slave, when I was asked to see one young man, Jeffrey L., because his behavior had become so bizarre that the prison authorities thought he needed to be evaluated for psychiatric illness. The incident that led to this referral had occurred in the prison Visiting Room, a setting in which inmates sit on one side of a long table and their visitors on the other. Jeffrey L.'s mother had just concluded a visit with him, when instead of merely saying goodbye he leaped over the table in an attempt to follow her out of the Visiting room and out of the prison, crying hysterically, clinging to her, begging her to take him home with her. Since he would not tell either his mother or the correction officers why he had behaved this way, they asked me to see him.

When I interviewed Jeffrey, I noted that he was a slightly built nineteen-year-old white man (or boy) who appeared even younger than his stated age, who was visibly trembling and appeared nearly frightened to death. What he described to me was a pattern of repeated gang rapes to which he had been subjected since first arriving in prison. He was sent to prison for a relatively minor, nonviolent offense. After he was convicted in court, he had first been sent to the medium-security prison to which all of the younger prisoners convicted of nonviolent crimes are initially sent for a brief "diagnostic" evaluation, on the basis of which they are assigned or "classified" to whatever long-term prison setting the authorities deem suitable for that particular individual; soon after arriving there, he was raped by a gang of other inmates. Because he felt overwhelmingly ashamed of what had happened to him, and also because he knew enough about the mores of the prison subculture to know that seeking help from the correctional authorities would be seen as informing or "ratting" on his fellow prisoners, and that the penalty for that in the world of the prison is capital punishment..., he refused to reveal to anyone what had happened.

As ordinarily happens with nonviolent first offenders, he was soon transferred to a minimum-security prison, where he was again gang-raped. In terror of a repetition of that experience, and in order to provoke the prison officials to transfer him elsewhere, he refused a direct order to return to the cell block to which he had been assigned (and in which he had been raped), and thus was transferred to a third (medium-security) prison, where he was promptly subjected to a gang rape for the third time. It was following that experience that he behaved as I described above the the Visiting Room.

I wish I could quote more of Chapter 7. Dr. Gilligan points out that approximately 10 million men pass through American jails and prisons each year (most of them are only there for a few days or weeks). Rape is routine in many jails.

It varies, however. Rape isn't universal. When I got busted for cultivation of marijuana, along with seven housemates (six white and one black), we spent one night in the Berkeley city jail. For some reason we were in a cell block by ourselves. The next morning, all but one of us bailed out. The remaining one, Terry, had an outstanding warrant, so they didn't let him out. They transferred him to another jail (I think it must have been Alameda County jail, in Oakland). Terry was a good-looking nineteen year old with long blond hair. After the first night, he wasn't in a cell block by himself. At the hearing, his lawyer tried to tell the judge what was happening, but the judge didn't want to hear it.

Dr. Gilligan notes that Jeffery was a 19-year old white man (or boy), but who were the rapists? He passes over that in silence. Let's move on to another book, You Are Going to Prison, by a prisoner who writes under the name Jim Hogshire. This is a Loompanics Press book.

Remember the rec room converted into a dorm we discussed earlier? Once a prison becomes this overcrowded the chances of violence of every kind skyrocket. A room like this quickly becomes host to what is known as "the covered wagon." Prisoners arrange the three-high bunk beds in a rough square and drape them with blankets to block off the view of the guards. It is in the middle of this that a gang rape can continue for an astonishing amount of time.

In 1973 a student protester didn't pay the $10 bail after being arrested at a Quaker pray-in at the White House where he was protesting the bombing of Cambodia. In the Washington, D.C. lockup he was almost immediately attacked by fellow prisoners, sodomized and forced to suck dick while being nearly beaten to death for three solid days... He was raped all day and all night. No guard came to his rescue.

Guys beaten and dragged into the covered wagon are set upon by dozens of men. They have all their teeth knocked out, they are forced to perform fellatio for hours and hours while being savagely fucked up the ass until their assholes literally gush blood. Even if the guards were able to detect what's going on (and they most certainly can), they would not do anything.

Rape, especially gang rape, is almost exclusively a black on white occurrence.  More than 90% of prison rapists are black and the instance of a white raping a black is the rarest of all. If this rankles your ideals about racial harmony and the essential equality of the races, etc. -- tough shit. Most rape victims are young and white... Blacks do sometimes rape other blacks, however; if you're black, you're not in the clear.

Many prisoners just kill themselves. Those who live and are released re-enter society every bit as fucked up as you might expect.

One alternative to rape is protective custody, in which a prisoner is removed from the general prison population. This is also known as "solitary confinement." Let's look at another excerpt from Dr. Gilligan's book, this time from Chapter 6. This is the story of Lloyd A., who was arrested and sent to prison for a "minor, nonviolent crime." There's that same expression again. It must be a euphemism for something. I would guess that both Jeffrey and Lloyd were arrested for possessing or selling drugs, although there are other possibilities. Anyway, here is what happened to Lloyd:

While he had been in prison, during his first sentence, prison officers found Lloyd A. to be a difficult, rebellious, often obnoxious and provocative young man. As a consequence, Lloyd A. had spent virtually his entire previous sentence in solitary confinement. When sufficiently annoyed, the correction officers would punish Lloyd A. by closing a solid steel door which covered the only exit from his tiny concrete cell, and by turning off the only light in his cell...

When Lloyd A. was particularly offensive to the officers, they would also remove his mattress and back up his toilet (which at that time was a hole in the floor), so that he would have to sleep on the concrete floor in his own excrement, accompanied by the vermin that are naturally attracted to such an environment. Furthermore, since Lloyd A. had broken so many rules, the parole board would not grant him a parole. So, for his minor and nonviolent crime, Lloyd A. ended up serving a longer sentence than he otherwise would have, spending the last two years - two years! - of his term in the conditions I have just described.

Moreover, instead of being released back into the community on parole status in a series of gradual transitions, with increasing levels of freedom, responsibility, and privileges, such as finding a job and beginning work while still living in a supervised and supportive residential facility, Lloyd A. was given no transitional period in which to readjust and adapt to the "outside." He was not eligible for any rehabilitative treatment whatsoever. Instead, one day, his full sentence was "rapped up" (prison slang for "completed"). On the day when the prison could no longer legally keep him, his solid door was opened, and Lloyd A. was led blinking into the daylight, through all the other solid doors that block access to the outside world, until he found himself out on the street.

Within a few days of his release, he killed one of the first people who crossed his path, somebody who had picked him up while hitchhiking. At his trial, the judge said he regretted that he could not sentence him to death, which he clearly deserved for such a heinous crime. That state no longer had the death penalty, so the judge sentenced Lloyd to life in prison without possibility of parole.

Rape has occurred in prisons as long as there have been prisons. What's unique about American prisons is the racial aspect of it. As Jim Hogshire said, it's almost always black on white. The same thing is noted on the Hardtime page:

Once a man "owns" another - and it is almost always a black "owning" a white - he is property in every sense. He can be rented out, sold or auctioned, told how to dress and talk, and given a woman's name. That this can happen is essentially unknown outside the prison world. "It would amaze you (as it did me) to see human beings bought & sold like shoes," writes a Texan prisoner. "You can buy a kid for 20 or 30 dollars on most wings!!" writes another. "They sell them like cattle."

The racial dynamic in prisons puts whites at a tremendous disadvantage. First, whites are often outnumbered by both blacks and Hispanics. But far more important, just as they show no racial solidarity in “the free world,” whites in prison do not band together to protect each other from predators. As No Escape reports, Hispanics sometimes rape Hispanics, and blacks sometimes rape blacks, but neither group permits anyone of another race to rape its own people. If a black tried to “turn out” a Mexican, the Mexicans would riot and try to kill him. Blacks also defend each other from white or Hispanic rapists. It is only whites—unless they are known members of white racialist gangs who do stick together—who are on their own and can be raped with impunity. It would be hard to think of a more cruel consequence of stripping whites of racial consciousness.

I agree with this last statement, of course, but I'm not sure it makes sense to say that racial consciousness was "stripped" from whites. I think it's something that just happened as we went through the various stages of "modernity," as they call it - first democracy in the 18th century, then romanticism in the 19th, then individualism in the 20th. White men can't feel racial solidarity any more than we can wear powdered wigs.

Africans and Hispanics still have a third world, tribal mentality, and we - all of us, including outlaws - have a "modern" mentality. This isn't something somebody did to us, its just a development that emerged in the natural course of events.

I know this is cold comfort to the white men who are in prison, but I think it's always important to understand the causes of things - and to understand that some things don't have simple causes. As long as we think somebody "stripped" away our racial consciousness, we are just confusing ourselves. The only way we can possibly deal with this problem is to understand how it happened.

The important thing to remember here is that history never gets stuck. Change is always possible. The kaleidoscope keeps turning, and new patterns appear. We have been in the doldrums for some time now, but sooner or later we are going to get our energy back and segue into something else.

My home page

the Stop Prison Rape site - external link

Some interesting background about Jim Hogshire - external link

Torture Inc. - America's Brutal Prisons - external link

Jeffery and Lloyd were locked up for "a relatively minor, nonviolent offense." I don't know what their offense was, but I know that out of the millions of men who are in jail or prison, a large percentage are there for marijuana crimes - selling, cultivation, or simple possession. What happened to Jeffery and Lloyd happens to many of them.

When I discovered pot, it was a major turning point in my life. It was one of the best things that ever happened to me. But I live in a society in which pot is illegal.  This is amazing, incomprehensible... How can they put people in jail (see above) for smoking pot?!  It just doesn't make sense.

I also live in a society in which they teach toddlers to listen to hip-hop. They are proud  of this. They are self-righteous about it. I have been told that I am insane, and not fit to be around children - why?  Because I don't believe in teaching babies to listen to rap. This too is incomprehensible.

Yes, that really happened. That is why I no longer see my godson.

In New Scientist  magazine, issue of 10 March 2001, there is a news item that is apropos here. The Digital Freedom Network website sponsored a contest in which prizes were awarded for reporting the most bizarre behaviour of censorware, i.e. software that is supposed to filter out "undesirable" material. New Scientist reports,

The grand prize went to Joe J., who reported being prevented from accessing his own high school's website from his own high school's library. It seems Carroll High School had adopted filtering software which blocked "all questionable material." This included the word "high."

The runner-up was a user named Hilary Anne, whose attempts to register the email address hillaryanne@hotmail.com were rejected because censorware spotted the hidden word "aryan."

I'm not sure either New Scientist or the DFN website would object to censoring someone who really meant to talk about getting high, or someone who really wanted to identify herself as Aryan. To them, the censorware is bizarre only because it finds these words in absurd contexts. This is a red herring. The question that needs to be asked is, why does the censorware look for those words in the first place?

Suppose the censorware is smart enough to find such words only when they occur in the intended sense. Suppose Hillary Anne tried to register the address proudaryan@hotmail.com, and the censorware wouldn't let her do it. Then what?  Wouldn't that be bizarre?

Suppose the censorware at Joe's high school is smart enough to filter out references to the word "high" in the psychedelic sense, and only in that sense. Suppose Joe tried to find out about getting high, and the censorware wouldn't let him do it. Wouldn't that be bizarre?
Why would they want to prevent anyone from finding out about attaining a higher state of consciousness?

The main question I want to raise is: why those two things?  

Why do the thought police single out "high" and "Aryan" as unsayable? What do those two things have in common?  Is there an idea that ties those two things together, or is it just an accident of cultural history that those two things happen to be unsayable?

There are some people who agree with me about pot, but they are liberals who think racism is anathema (except anti-white racism, of course - other examples can be found here and here). There are some people who agree with me about rap, but they are conservatives for whom pot is anathema.

But as far as I'm concerned, they go together. I'm both pro-white and pro-pot. This is the 915 concept.

In the 1996 election, there were several propositions on the ballot in California. Proposition 209 was against affirmative action. Proposition 215 was to legalize marijuana for medical purposes. They both  passed. Similar propositions also passed in Arizona and more recently in Washington. These propositions didn't just squeak by, they passed with healthy majorities. In Washington, they both passed with 57 or 58% of the vote.

Of course some people support one but not the other, but since both propositions passed with clear majorities, there must be some people who agree with both of them. When 209 and 215 both passed, I was amazed.

That was when it dawned on me that I am not alone.

There must be at least a few people who not only agree with the propositions but think they don't go far enough. There must be at least a few people who think pot should never have been illegal in the first place, and who don't want to be forced to live with Africans.

We are all supposed to support the American agenda, i.e. the attempt to create a drug-free society and an integrated society. There must be a few who think, as I do, that the American agenda is monstrous. It's the exact opposite of what we should be doing.

Since I don't know of any idea that ties those two things together, I decided to just make something up. I call it the 915 concept, where 915 refers to a combination of 209 and 215. The number 915 is supposed to be like 420, the number pot smokers have been using to identify themselves for several years, but with the opposite political and musical orientation.

If I could just go ahead and live my life, I wouldn't be doing this. But I find myself living in a society that has declared war on me, for no apparent reason, and I have nowhere to turn. Nobody in public life speaks for me. People who are pro-white and pro-pot are totally outside the American political system (not to mention the European political system, or any other political system). We have no voice, no representation, no place in society. There is no room for non-suicidal whites on the left, and no room for pot smokers on the right. That leaves a lot of people with nowhere to go.

If no one speaks for us, it's up to us to speak for ourselves.

We have a right to be who we are. We have a right to live our lives without being part of somebody's project.

The question is how we can get leverage on the situation and defend our rights. Easier said than done.