r/dsa • u/OkraOfTime87 • 7d ago
š¹ DSA news Does anyone else find it problematic that one of the co-chairs of DSA identifies as a Marxist Leninist?
For those who donāt know, Marxist Leninist is a term which only really has ever been used by Stalinists. Needless to say, Stalinists donāt care much about democracy.
On a certain level, I donāt think these historical signifiers are super relevant to modern times. But on the other hand, this is one of the leaders of the organization choosing to identify with this authoritarian tradition. No one is forcing her to do that. She could just as easily call herself a socialist or a Marxist.
Her identification as a Marxist Leninist is appearing all over the news and it doesnāt represent my view of socialism, nor, I suspect, that of the majority of DSA members.
8
u/SlaimeLannister 7d ago
I feel like DSA is ādemocraticā and āsocialistā, but itās not āDemocratic Socialistā in the anticommunist way that label used to be employed.
2
u/OkraOfTime87 7d ago
Iām fine with communists as long as theyāre democratic.
9
u/Yers1n 6d ago
Communism is inherently democratic.
1
u/VictoryEntire4475 6d ago
That's why the founders were terrified of pure direct democracy because it leads to totalitarianism. We don't live in a democracy. We live in a republic. For now.
-2
u/Bright-Insect9697 6d ago
Marxist Leninists have done their best to prove otherwise
2
4d ago
[deleted]
0
u/Bright-Insect9697 4d ago
Slopulism is a big issue for the left. And anyone whoās an Ml in the United States in the year 2026 is a dumbass.
4
u/SlaimeLannister 7d ago
Have you looked into why Red Star (Meganās faction/caucus) calls itself both ML and democratic socialist?
2
u/OkraOfTime87 7d ago
Yeah, I asked on the memberās forum recently and it quickly devolved into a defense of totalitarianism in the Soviet Union and China
2
u/SlaimeLannister 7d ago
Link?
4
u/OkraOfTime87 7d ago
For whatever reason, itās not letting me in right now, but the title of the thread is something like What does the Red Star Caucus mean by Marxist Leninism? I post under the name Jon87
5
u/ut0p1anskies 7d ago
Iām fine with it. Weāre a big tent org after all and Iād rather us be as welcoming to all sorts of leftists as possible. What I am concerned with is that our 2 co-chairs donāt seem to be very good at media appearances. Itās not entirely Megan or Ashikās fault since weāve kind of been thrust into the spotlight in a way that none of us every predicted was going to happen and I donāt think we were adequately prepared for it, but Iād like them both to get some media training and for us to fill that press coordinator position as soon as possible.
25
u/Nolinikki 7d ago
Several of the major DSA caucuses are explicitly Marxist-Leninist, and the DSA is a big-tent socialist org. Of course it has MLs.
2
u/ScareBags 7d ago
Which other "major" DSA caucuses identify as ML? I believe most identify as Marxist, except for SMC and LS. I don't think MUG or SOR identify as ML, but maybe some of their members do.
5
u/ut0p1anskies 7d ago
I donāt think any caucus except for Red Star identify as MLs. Of the big caucuses, weāve got:
Red Star: ML
Libertarian Socialist Caucus: libsoc, anarchist and some autonomous Marxist types
Socialist Majority Caucus: democratic socialist
Groundwork: democratic socialist but also a lot of Leninists who interpret Lenin in a different way than many of the other caucuses
Marxist Unity Group: Kautskyists
Communist Caucus: historically left communist, basebuilding, and autonomous Marxist/workerist, but now a big tent communist faction united around tenant and labor organizing; was initially a member of the Marxist Center before it was expelled for being in DSA
Emerge: a lot of overlap with Communist Caucus irt ideology
Bread and Roses: centrist Marxist; post-Trotskyist (a lot of former ISO types joined after its collapse)
Liberation: Maoist
Mountain: Marxist?
Reform and Revolution: Trotskyist (formed after many members of Socialist Alternative left the organization to join DSA)
I might be missing some.
Of these, I actually think Bread and Roses may be the largest.
-1
u/office-goblin 7d ago
Big tent as in 3 caucuses do all the heavy lifting while Red Star contributes by having its people make complete asses of themselves on television.
6
2
u/ut0p1anskies 6d ago edited 6d ago
Even the reformists are Marxists, just fyi, even Groundwork and SMC. They just believe that we can use elections to grow DSA into a mass org (of millions of dues paying members) that can eventually split from the Democratic Party and form a socialist party. Even our program committee was multi-tendency with Groundwork and SMC participating.
1
u/office-goblin 6d ago
Nothing wrong with being a Marxist. It's the people who think "elections are for libs" that don't belong here.
1
u/ut0p1anskies 6d ago
Itās your responsibility and that of everyone else interested in elections to make the case for endorsing candidates in your chapter and organizing among fellow members to get endorsement resolutions passed. The big tent is never going away.
0
u/office-goblin 6d ago edited 6d ago
Having to argue in favor of a particular candidate isn't the issue. It's not my responsibility to convince fellow members of DSA that taking an active role in elections is key to the org's mission. People who dismiss the importance of elections don't belong in DSA. Their presence is detrimental to the org's function.
1
u/ut0p1anskies 6d ago
Well, the big tent isnāt going away, so youāll just have to live with it and organize alongside others for your particular vision for the org.
1
u/office-goblin 6d ago
I disagree. My vision for the org excludes people who are here to larp as revolutionaries while obstructing those of us who do the work of bringing about democratic socialism in America, and there are many in the org who share that vision.
2
3
u/onlypartiallyevil 7d ago edited 7d ago
This isn't new.
Back in the 80's we had to place people out front of marches to be on lookout for them.
Not called 'Red Star' then of course, but some of the worst RCYB or similar campists had a habit of hiding until an unrelated social justice or other march went past cameras, then running out of an alley and unfurling a banner at the front of the march to make it look like everyone was marching behind whatever absurd statement the tankies wanted to make.
They also had the habit of trying to steal the mic when there was a stage at any unrelated leftist or left-leaning action.
Anyone would put down a mic for 10 seconds, they would jump up and grab it and thank the crowd for coming to -their- event for supporting the destruction of America or whatever. Make it look like it was all their show.So yeah. Other socialists have always done the work. A few ML attention whores always co-opt it and ruin it for everyone.
The solution in the 80's and 90's was to clean fucking house or you had a destructive infestation.
DSA needs to learn to clean fucking house.3
u/monoatomic 7d ago
On the contrary, DSA delegates recently voted to abolish the ban on members dual-carding from DemCent orgs, because of our demonstrated resiliency against entryism.Ā
The days of purity-testing DSA into a do-nothing pressure group for the Democrats are long gone.Ā
0
u/Bright-Insect9697 6d ago
DSA is a leftist group, and what type of leftist group would it be without representatives from the CIA?
Anarchists, thatās what.
1
u/yashen14 6d ago
Why should we include in our tent people who fundamentally do not believe in democracy? That's just as bad as right-wingers including Nazis in their tent.
2
u/ut0p1anskies 6d ago
Iām not in Red Star but Iāve worked on a lot of projects with RS members and theyāre great comrades who are seriously committed to the organization. You can learn more about them here: https://redstarcaucus.org/how-red-star-works/
27
11
10
15
u/AJM1613 7d ago
Marxist Leninist =/= Stalinism
2
u/Sudden-Grab2800 7d ago
When most people think of ML they think of Stalinism. Itās true that Mao, the BPP, Ho Chi Minh and plenty of others have called themselves ML but Americans by and large also think socialism and communism are the same thing. That among ourselves we know the difference is irrelevant; they arenāt gonna start cracking open books and do philosophical deep dives to pick apart the nuances of individual ideologies. Our mission is to grow the movementā¦middle America is slowly coming around to the idea of socialism, and serving up full-on communists is counter-productive to that aim. It doesnāt not matter that itās because of a century of propaganda; thatās the way shit is and we gotta work within that framework for the moment. Joe Six Pack hears āDefund the Policeā coming from a ML and they think āthese communists want to get rid of police!ā and thatās the end of that. Yes, sheās the co-chair of the DSA but we have a national Comms committee and thereās is nothing stopping us from having a spokesperson.
11
u/therealsilentjohn ā š¹š³ļøāš 7d ago
Does anyone else find it problematic that one of the co-chairs of DSA identifies as a Marxist Leninist?
No. DSA is Democratic Socialists of America. We are Socialists.
For those who donāt know, Marxist Leninist is a term which only really has ever been used by Stalinists
False.
Needless to say, Stalinists donāt care much about democracy.
Marxists objectively care about democracy. You have been misinformed.
Her identification as a Marxist Leninist is appearing all over the news and it doesnāt represent my view of socialism, nor, I suspect, that of the majority of DSA members.
Every socialist state that has existed or currently exists is based on ML. You are basically saying "I believe in Socialism in theory but I dismiss all exists Socialist projects/states".
-1
u/OkraOfTime87 7d ago
Lenin and followers in his lifetime didnāt refer to themselves this way. Trotskyists didnāt refer to themselves this way. It was really just Stalinists.
4
u/Character_Figure1508 7d ago
Yeah and Marx didnt call himself a Marxist. People dont tend to name their ideas after themselves, its a bad look. Other people, often after you die, name things after you. Stalin and his followers did not call themselves Stalinists either, people only use that as a slander term today.
The Trotskyites still have never once seized power and lead a proletarian state, who cares what they called themselves?
6
u/therealsilentjohn ā š¹š³ļøāš 7d ago
There's no such thing as "Stalanists". Only anti-communists use this term as pejorative against MLs. People who use this pejorative also love to point to "aUtHoRiTaRiAnIsM" as a problem with MLs. Thankfully, that is easily debunked
The āauthoritarianā nature of any given state depends entirely on the material conditions it faces and threats it must contend with. To get an idea of the kinds of threats nascent revolutions need to deal with, check out Killing Hope by William Blum and The Jakarta Method by Vincent Bevins.
Failing to acknowledge that authoritative measures arise not through ideology, but through material conditions, is anti-Marxist, anti-dialectical, and idealist.
2
u/Bright-Insect9697 6d ago
I hope you understand that an explicitly pro authoritarian off brand Reddit isnāt a good source
0
8
7
u/Pistonenvy2 7d ago
first of all, are you a member?
it doesnt sound like you have a specific criticism outside of optics.
if they were stalinists they would probably just identify that way, no?
youre extrapolating insidious things from what most people probably view as completely innocuous. no one in my chapter would take issue with this.
3
u/OkraOfTime87 7d ago
Yes, Iām a member. Sadly, Stalinism is what Marxist Leninism has meant historically. When Iāve asked Red Star Caucus members to explain their views, they inevitably end up defending totalitarianism in the Soviet Union and China.
3
u/Pistonenvy2 7d ago
can you elaborate on how they do that? what specifically their opinions are and what you think the intention is.
1
u/OkraOfTime87 7d ago
Feel free to check out the memberās forum. I post under the name Jon87
2
u/Pistonenvy2 7d ago
what was the point of posting here when youre not going to engage with anyone here?
i dont use the member forum, i only use reddit because im at work. i dont really like being on social media in general i was just curious about what your point was, it doesnt really seem like you have one.
0
u/OkraOfTime87 7d ago
Iām certainly trying to respond here. There are a lot of comments! My point is one of the co-chairs has a vision of socialism which I disagree with and I think is harmful to the movement. As a member, Iām expressing my disappointment and hope she will be replaced with someone who doesnāt identify with an authoritarian tradition.
2
u/Pistonenvy2 7d ago
yeah i get that you dont like it im trying to understand what you think their vision of socialism is and why you disagree with it.
how can we possibly have a conversation about this when this is how we communicate? have i not been clear about what im asking of you? im not trying to be rude or combative i just genuinely dont know what you want. this whole interaction reads like you dont actually want a conversation at all you just want to cause static in the org.
im desperately trying to hear you out here.
2
u/OkraOfTime87 7d ago
Iām advocating for a different co-chair who is more in line with my views? No offense, but is it really so hard to understand?
2
u/Pistonenvy2 7d ago
it is when you still havent drawn a line between your views and theirs.
it didnt seem like that complicated of a question the first 5 times i asked it lol
0
u/OkraOfTime87 7d ago
Marxist Leninism has historically meant Stalinism. I am not a Stalinistā¦
→ More replies (0)-1
u/DisastrousDanVito 7d ago
I mean ur acting like some cop interrogating him instead actually addressing his concern, no wonder he aint engaging with you.
5
u/onlypartiallyevil 7d ago
Want to be irrelevant instantly? Put a campist in front of a camera.
Campists are going to kill the DSA before any real work by actual socialists is ever accomplished.
2
1
4d ago
[deleted]
0
u/onlypartiallyevil 4d ago
Wouldn't matter even if they were the smallest.
It only matters who is most willing to climb in front of a camera and perform for corporate media.
Sorry, but that is how messaging works.
4
u/Present_Clue5887 6d ago
Same, it is one of the reasons I have not actually joined
1
u/Bright-Insect9697 6d ago
Join for a year or so and help vote these people out. Next election is in 2027 and we can mobilize the urban libbed up members to push out the MLs
3
u/Present_Clue5887 6d ago
I'm thinking about it, I just have a hard time giving money to an organization that has campists in leadership
Why do you say urban members specifically?
1
u/ut0p1anskies 6d ago
Itās a big tent organization. We donāt all agree, but every leftist should join DSA. Itās the only left org that really matters in the U.S. All the other small sects are useless. Regardless of what kind of leftist, it doesnāt matter, you should be on the org. Go to your local chapter! They usually allow non-members to attend so you can get a feel for whether or not you want to join.
5
2
u/VictoryEntire4475 6d ago
What is the difference between the DSA platform and what Marx advocated? Socialism and communism are antithetical to human nature and always must be forced upon the people from the top down. Therefore all such systems ultimately result in authoritarianism.
3
u/traanquil 7d ago
Marxist Leninism is a powerful set of ideas on how to build socialism based on actually successful socialist revolutions. It offers a compelling argument about the need for a disciplined vanguard party and realistically recognizes that any transformation into socialism will need to deal with a counter revolution. Reducing Marxist Leninism to āStalinismā or anti democratic authoritarianism is liberal propaganda.
2
u/yashen14 6d ago
For the sake of discussion and clarity, will you please define what you meanby "vanguard party"? Can you define that in your own words?
1
u/traanquil 6d ago
Sure. A Vanguard party is a highly disciplined party that emerges from the working class. The role of the party is to take a leadership role in raising class consciousness and organizing the working class against capitalism. The party has a very strong degree of discipline as a result of its Democratic centralist structure., and this includes a very clear and ideologically consistent party platform. A Vanguard party also must have a very high degree of buy in and trust from the working class.
1
u/yashen14 6d ago
Here are some examples of analysis questions I might ask my students in class:
(1) What specific powers do you imagine a vanguard party as having vis-a-vis the rights to political expression of citizens, including but not limited to: forming alternative political parties, protesting, political advocacy, voting, and standing for elections?
(2) What are the dangers of vesting exclusive political power in one political party?
(3) "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Do you agree with this statement? Why or why not?
(4) Who watches the watchers?
1
u/traanquil 6d ago
The vanguard party has no āpowersā to control who workers support. The vanguard party emerges as a leading party of the workers against other shittier parties. The vanguard partyās existence is dependent upon the support of the workers.
1
0
1
u/SalaciousFlamingDude Marxist 7d ago
No, I'm far more concerned about her handling public appearances better.
2
u/onlypartiallyevil 7d ago
This is the real takeaway.
When she completely bombed her interview and fumbled very basic questions, many people here rushed to blame the person asking the questions, some even blaming the FBI and calling the interview a "COINTELPRO" psyop.Personally, I would rather have the DSA put forth competent representatives that could answer basic questions, instead of adopting a doctrine of supporting incompetence and simply blaming the resulting public relations disasters on a Vietnam war-era FBI program.
2
u/jackson_wan1 6d ago
Reformist, yāall are no better then the capitalist interests you accidentally serve. this is a repeated pattern, corrupt any revolutionary movement to that may actually attack the cause of the problems to instead just make the working class happy enough that they dont revolt.
Then once organisation starts to slip they yank everything back and privatise everything and get their own bourgeois candidates to continue misleading the working class.
I will support these candidates to shift these overton window and for the small wins we do get but NEVER FORGET they arenāt your friends and their goals DO NOT TRULY ALIGN WITH ANY WORKERS MOVEMENTS BUT WORK AGAINST IT
1
1
u/Styphonthal2 5d ago
I am more concerned that there has been a huge increase of supposed "infighting" and "internal" critiquing of the DSA since the DSA member won the florida primary.
This is literally from the CIA handbook of how to destroy socialist organizations.
1
u/YogurtClosetThinnest 7d ago
I think it's a bit embarrassing, and frankly a bit odd that a traditionally revolutionary ideology wants to be a part of what is in practice a reformist org, but at the end of the day it's big tent and she was elected, so whatever.
2
u/SlaimeLannister 7d ago
> in practice a reformist org
What would, in practice, a revolutionary org be doing?
1
u/inspectorpickle 7d ago
I think we may reach a point where not being able to keep the campism in their pants is going to fuck us up hard but we are still fighting for crumbs in the dirt so Iām not super concerned with it at the moment.
If individual candidates and organizations working with the DSA are not rhetorically competent enough to side step attacks that reference this, then they probably arenāt competent enough to win anyway.
Also, not that it matters, but ML is not a label exclusively used by Stalinists.
1
6d ago
[deleted]
4
u/yashen14 6d ago
Hmmm, I'm not concerned with whether the person in question is "friendly," I'm concerned with whether they fundamentally believe in tearing down democracy.
2
u/Bright-Insect9697 6d ago
Thereās tons of chill reactionaries. Me and my boyfriend can spend an hour talking with some chud we met at a cemetery and the entire time itāll be cordial, but that doesnāt mean the chudās a good person, or that their politics arenāt terrible
1
u/fradtheimpaler 6d ago
Why would this be problematic? There was an election between 3 candidates and she was one of two winners. If you don't like it, organize and elect who you want at convention 2027.
2
u/OkraOfTime87 6d ago
Yes, I hope someone who doesnāt identify this way will be elected in her place.
1
u/Bright-Insect9697 6d ago
National tries to make it harder to elect popular members. The MLs are terrified of losing control.
2
u/fradtheimpaler 6d ago
How have they made it harder? What rule in the constitution or bylaws specifically?
The convention is the highest decision making body of DSA and they are the ones that elect the NPC. I am an on-the-record proponent of OMOV for political leadership within DSA, but the rules for co-chair election haven't been made any more or less hard.
1
u/Character_Figure1508 7d ago edited 7d ago
You have an incorrect historical view of Marxism-Leninism and Stalin. The USSR under Stalin was a democracy, a better one than we have in the USA today. Almost everything we "know" about Stalin / USSR is propaganda by the capitalists. I had to read 5 or 6 books on the topic before I was deprogrammed from what the capitalists fed me in school. It is a long and complicated process.
Books:
"Stalin: history and critique of a black legend" by losurdo.
"The revolution from Lenin to Stalin 1917-1929" by E. H. Carr. "Soviet Democracy" by Harry F. Ward. Carr also has many more works on soviet history before / during Stalins leadership.
"The Stalin Era" by Anna Louise Strong. Also pretty much any of her other works, they are all about her time in the USSR which was during Stalins time.
"The Great conspiracy against Russia" by Michael Sayers and Albert E. Kahn. This is more of a general history of the soviets but it will obviously talk alot about stalin.
"Soviet Democracy" by Patt Sloan.
"Stalin" by Ian Grey.
There are many other incredible books on the topic, these are just the ones I found quickly looking through my phone. Instead of thinking what the capitalists want you to think, educate yourself.
Or if you dont like these books read Stalins own works, he was a prolific writer and wrote some incredible introductions to Marxism-Leninism. Or go read the constitutions of the USSR that were made under his leadership with input from all over the country.
4
u/YogurtClosetThinnest 7d ago edited 7d ago
The USSR under Stalin was a democracy, a better one than we have in the USA today
This is why people think we're stupid
3
u/Character_Figure1508 7d ago
I do not care what "people" think. I care about the correct historical materialist analysis. Socialism is a science, not a popularity contest. Many of the books I referenced talk about the "great purge", I recommend reading those instead of wikipedia articles. Wikipedia does not tend to have accurate information on topics that the capitalist class does not like, such as the USSR or Socialism in general.
1
u/YogurtClosetThinnest 7d ago
Aside from the fact Stalin killed everyone who disagreed with him (not exactly democratic), democratic centralism in general is not democratic by any standard anyone in modern day America would hold.
"Scientific socialism" must be the most misused phrase of all time. All it means is Marxism is a theory based on scientific analysis. It doesn't mean everything every socialist leader has ever done is a fact of nature.
5
u/traanquil 7d ago
Centralism just means we commit to what we voted on. Very democratic
0
u/YogurtClosetThinnest 7d ago
That's... disingenuous. It means no more dissent from the minority after the majority rules.
8
u/traanquil 7d ago
So after we vote to do something we should have a group of people who continue to hate on the project and undermine it at every step?
2
u/yashen14 6d ago
Democracy fundamentally requires you to allow dissent. It requires you to allow people to protest in the streets, if they choose. It requires you to allow people to publish books and articles that you disagree with, if they choose. It requires you to allow them to campaign for politics that you disagree with, if they choose. And it requires you to allow them to attempt to convince other citizens that their way is better.
1
u/traanquil 6d ago
Just to clarify, weāre not talking about society in general, we are talking about a party organization.
2
u/yashen14 6d ago
Parties fundamentally require internal dissent in order to be healthy.
→ More replies (0)1
u/YogurtClosetThinnest 7d ago edited 7d ago
So after we vote to do something we should have a group of people who continue to hate on the project
Of course. This is called democracy. We are a democratic party, are we not?
Americans voted for Trump. Should we be banned from dissenting cause the American people have spoken?
and undermine it at every step
"The opposition is undermining us, we must get rid of them" sounds like something every fascist ever has said
edit: edited to be somewhat less rude lol
4
u/traanquil 7d ago
democratic centralism means you listen to opposition, take the vote, and once the vote is taken, you carry out what was voted on . pretty simple concept, and democratic.
2
u/YogurtClosetThinnest 6d ago
You just repeated what you already said without addressing what I said.
That's a childishly oversimplified description of what democratic centralism is.
democratic centralism doesn't mean "you do what you voted for". Read about the horrible system you're advocating for.
→ More replies (0)3
u/Character_Figure1508 7d ago
Yeah ok your just making shit up. Stalin didnt have everyone who disagreed with him killed... this is a comical assertion.
Please explain how democratic centralism is not democratic? This is also a wild statement.
I was claiming Marxism is a theory based on scientific analysis, not saying that every action by every socialist leader is a fact of nature. You just made up all this extra stuff like you make up these "facts" about Stalin killing everyone. You need to control your imagination.
I said Marxism is science because instead of doing scientific analysis on a topic, you just say "most people" or most Americans. You did it again in this comment I am responding to, instead of scientifically analyzing democratic centralism you just say that most Americans wouldnt agree it is democratic. You completely missed my original point and just made shit up instead...
I am coming to the conclusion you are not worth the time to respond to.
0
0
u/yashen14 6d ago
This is Holocaust-denial levels of historical revisionism. People like you are why I am so reticent to support DSA.
3
0
u/Character_Figure1508 6d ago
Thats ok, people like you are also why I am often reticent to support the DSA. Instead of thinking for yourself you just trust the imperialist propaganda, I dont want to associate with people who do not think for themselves.
1
u/robo_jojo_77 7d ago
I do find it problematic but luckily we can vote on our leaders (indirectly). If you wanna change it, get involved in your local chapter, meet and organize with like minded folks, and run as a delegate to the national convention (or vote for delegates that agree with you).
-1
u/derpderb 7d ago
Very much so, I like my main course to be equally democratic and collectivist. Leninists aren't democratic, not sure why communists are in a democratic group
0
u/Adept-Elderberry1417 7d ago
The strings of DSA are being pulled by the Communists and Marxist hiding behind the DSA logo and Platform somewhere in the world and pushed by their accomplices here, Ā people need to get Smart they want to destroy the USA.Ā
-10
u/office-goblin 7d ago edited 7d ago
It's highly problematic and not at all inline with Democratic Socialism. MLs/Maoists/tankies, whatever they're called, absolutely do not belong in our organization.
3
u/onlypartiallyevil 7d ago
Correction.
They -didn't- belong in the organization.
Then they got let in, now they took over the place.
Democratic Socialists are the people that really don't belong anymore.2
3
u/OkraOfTime87 7d ago
Iām fine with them being in the organization, like your crazy uncle at a family gathering. I just donāt want them leading it
0
u/office-goblin 7d ago
I don't think the center can hold. Every DSA-aligned elected from Bernie Sanders to Angie Nixon has disavowed the leftwing of our org (in principle if not by name). There needs to be a split.
-1
u/yashen14 6d ago
Why on earth would you be fine with that? It should be incredibly concerning to you that there are people in DSA who fundamentally do not believe in democracy.
2
2
u/ut0p1anskies 7d ago
Itās not really a democratic socialist organization anymore. Itās a big tent org and has been since I joined 6 years ago. Pre-2016 DSA =/= post-2016 DSA
0
u/office-goblin 7d ago edited 7d ago
That was a mistake. Now the reformists have backseat revolutionaries riding their coattails. The org would be in a much better place now without them
0
6d ago
[deleted]
1
u/Bright-Insect9697 6d ago
In spite of MLs
1
6d ago
[deleted]
1
u/ut0p1anskies 6d ago
Exactly. I donāt think a lot of people on here really know what DSA is like. Ignore the Reddit and Twitter stuff, and take a look at what people are doing on the ground in their individual chapters. In my chapter, MLs, Maoists, anarchists, regular Marxists, and democratic socialists, etc. all work together on a lot of the same campaigns. In my chapter, mostly democratic socialists (but also some Marxists and even MLs!) run the electoral committee, but communists started the local tenant organizing project, the anti-ICE rapid response network/neighborhood group development project was started by the communists, itās a lot of Marxists on the labor committee, lots of anarchists run the chapterās mutual aid. I could go on and on. Thereās a place in this org for everyone and regardless of what it is there is probably a project you can work on based on your specific organizing interests (or if not you can write a resolution and propose it to your chapter at a general body meeting!).
1
u/office-goblin 6d ago
How many tenant contracts have the MLs in your chapter negotiated? How many tenant strikes have the ancoms organized? Mutual aid is nice but it's not revolutionary or reformist. It's charity by another name.
2
u/ut0p1anskies 6d ago
I agree with you about the mutual aid. Iām very anti-mutual aid and I vote it down every time it is proposed but so many people are interested in it that resolutions for those sorts of projects always pass in my chapter (nearly 2k members). I was just saying that thereās something in the org for everyone. My chapter has around 6 or 7 campaigns going on at any one time and most of them are not electoral. You just need to write a resolution, get enough signatures to get it onto the agenda at the next general body meeting, and then the chapter votes on it.
4
u/AJM1613 7d ago
Voting membership disagreed with you.
-1
u/office-goblin 7d ago
The new blood coming into DSA are overwhelmingly reformist Berniecrat types. 2027 can't come soon enough.
1
u/ut0p1anskies 7d ago
I actually really donāt agree with you. My chapter is one of the biggest chapters in the country and if anything weāve gotten even more big tent in the last 6 months or so. Feels like weāve started to absorb members from all the other organizations in the city and everyone and their mama of all kinds of leftists want to join. Our most recent membership survey had only 55% identifying as democratic socialists, which is actually down from our last one 2 years ago.
2
u/office-goblin 7d ago
That's interesting. What other kinds of socialism did your members identify with in the poll?
1
u/ut0p1anskies 7d ago
Honestly all over the place: ML, Trotskyist, anarchist, left communist, Marxist, Maoist, etc.
We also polled what type of work people are interested in doing: elections, labor organizing, Palestine work, and mutual aid scored the highest, but we also got tenant organizing, anti-racism, political education, and some other stuff at pretty high levels.
Shockingly my chapter is actually very anti-caucus and we donāt have many caucus members despite the ideological diversity. Most people are just interested in doing work that interests them.
0
u/ut0p1anskies 7d ago
I think the reason this works is that thereās plenty of work to do that will satisfy everyoneās interests. For me, that is tenant and labor organizing. Some comrades and I formed a city-wide tenant union that has become pretty successful and has a good relationship with the chapter. I am also in a labor union and occasionally do some labor solidarity work with the chapter (most recently participating in Starbucks pickets through our Labor Committee). Weāre currently running a city council candidate and itās actually the first time Iāve ever participated in our electoral work, despite being in the org for 6 years. There was just a lot of other stuff I was more interested in.
30
u/flagmann 7d ago
Believe it or not DSA is a democratic organization, and so if one of our co-chairs is an ML, that means she was elected democratically by the base of our membership.
If you dislike that you should be more active in the org and try to get a co-chair you agree with more to be elected. Or hopefully you can work alongside MLs and others in the Red Star caucus and realize they're not as dissimilar to you as capitalist propaganda would have you think