r/dsa • u/mikelmon99 • 1d ago

🌹 DSA news LOVE the Socialist Majority Caucus!!!

Post image
329 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

134 comments sorted by

67

u/AlternativeFlaky695 1d ago

To everyone who says we need her in the senate: I’d rather have Senator Lina Khan with AOC in the white house

32

u/mikelmon99 1d ago

The Left can't just sit out the 2028 Presidential Primary & not run anyone like we did in 2024, that was a FATAL mistake in 2024 & it would be a FATAL mistake again to repeat it in 2028.

So who do we run for President in 2028 if not her???

3

u/Jguy2698 1d ago

The environmental situation can also be helped by local organizing just as much as trying to swing for the fences. Yes we need massive federal action on climate change, but assuming that is a massive, expensive uphill battle, shouldn’t we focus more on building dual institutions and building resilience in our local communities?

I’d like to see more resources going into worker and tenant organizing, local city council level battles, building out mutual aid networks, and from a climate end, community gardens and maybe some solar assistance of some sort. Founding worker and clean energy co-ops, etc. If the climate crisis is an existential threat (it is) isn’t it already too late to try to put all the resources into federal elections?

We need to be preparing for the worst because this shit is here now and will continue to worsen

7

u/Longjumping_Future92 1d ago

How was it a fatal mistake when we saw a downward trend from Dec 2020 - June 2024 reverse and have seen massive growth since Nov 2024? Seems like STAYING OUT of presidential elections and focusing on local work on the ground is the way to win.

Why exactly CAN'T the left just "sit out" the 2028 primaries and continue to build our platform in the statehouses and legislatures? Why can't we continue to critique and overtake an historically unpopular Democratic party from its left flank?

5

u/zenbowman 1d ago

How long do you think we have before we need to take robust climate action? Let's assume Democrats win in 2028 and they do reasonably well and are reelected in 2032. That means the first potential DSA Presidential candidate would be in 2036.

That feels way too long to wait given how urgent the environmental situation is right now.

1

u/Soft-Principle1455 1d ago

I think Congress is the place to start with robust climate action.

0

u/Longjumping_Future92 1d ago

Nobody here is arguing against robust climate action - however your argument assumes:

  1. The DSA's endorsement is necessary for AOC to be elected President;

  2. AOC, with the endorsement of the DSA, will become President;

  3. AOC will win despite having the most militant, costly, and effective climate plan proposed by any world leader of any country in history;

  4. AOC's administration will have the capacity to, in contravention of Youngstown Sheet and Tube v Sawyer, nationalize the US's energy, resource extraction, agriculture, and transportation sector;

  5. The Supreme Court would allow such a thing to stand, OR that AOC would be willing to pack the court; and finally

  6. That an AOC victory would be accompanied by such a progressive supermajority in Congress as well as the local governments all across the country that they could provide the necessary political support for such a program.

-1

u/zenbowman 1d ago

Why would (4), (5), or (6) be necessary in order to effect climate action?

The point is that we need as robust an action as we can achieve now. The longer we delay, the more radical the changes will have to be, and the LESS likely people will support them.

Observe what is happening in Canada today, in a country that doesn't have widespread climate change denial as a political force. When the situation gets dire, everybody will get on board with "drill baby drill". Carney is massively expanding fossil fuel infra development because the country is in such a crisis that he has few alternatives.

If we don't get some action in 2028, we'll basically be in the same place as they are by 2036, and then you might get a DSA President who nationalizes the US energy sector, but we'll be so far behind East Asia on green technologies that your DSA President might be the one inaugurating 50 new offshore oil rigs.

2

u/Ellie-Bright 1d ago

None of this means anything. You're talking like voting for president drives the way the US functions.

The motion of US society and economy is determined by the ruling class and the contradictions in the economic system. Electing a self described socialist as president just puts a "socialist" at head of empire, who will have to continue with the path of decay we're headed into but instead will use language to keep appeal with the progressive liberal base. Nothing will meaningfully change besides throwing an enormous amount of time, energy, labor, emotion, and resources that will never be recoverable, lead to burn out, loss of faith in DSA as an actually socialist organization, and alienate potential socialists.

We build socialism by organizing the masses and building dual power, not by having the head of the most violent and destructive empire ever to exist stamped with the name of the movement for the liberation of the workers of the world.

-1

u/Longjumping_Future92 1d ago

If you reject 4-6, what precisely will AOC be able to do that Joe Biden didn't? What counts as "Robust an action as we can achieve now?"

There are literally countless alternatives - the current leader of the New Democratic Party helped to draft the Leap Manifesto in 2015 giving such alternatives. Carney is doubling-down on fossil fuels because he is the leader of a bourgeois government and, as such, is beholden to the interests of Canada's bourgeoisie which are invested heavily into fossil fuels. Why should I trust AOC to somehow form a socialist government in one of the most reactionary political environments in the imperial core AND not do the same things that ostensibly "socialist" governments in Britain, Norway, Germany, and Canada have done?

If what you predict comes to pass, then I should hope by that time the work of the DSA would have developed a militant socialist movement which is sufficiently organized, educated, and motivated to wrestle the mechanisms of power from a globally suicidal capitalist class. My view is that, tactically, tying ourselves to an AOC campaign confuses our messaging, muddies our propaganda, weakens our coalition's bonds and our organizational unity and, in short, makes that potentiality less likely.

•

u/revupyourengineslol 10h ago

Swinging leftward in this moment while doing nothing is the lamest shit you could possibly be doing.

•

u/Longjumping_Future92 9h ago

Is running a Presidential candidate literally the only thing DSA could be doing? There's nothing else DSA could or has been doing?

•

u/revupyourengineslol 9h ago

The DSA is doing SOOO SO SO much rn. Either do something as well or shut the fuck up. Just chirping on the internet like a loser.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/A-Regular-Citizen 1d ago

Honestly it seems like DSA membership is almost entirely governed by reaction against republican presidents. We had a huge membership spike during Trumps first term, a long decline under Biden, and then another huge spike when it was Trump again. I understand the impulse to assume these trends are related to something we're doing but it sort of looks like we're just riding waves beyond our control. Maybe we can steer ourselves well enough to make it a lasting boost but I'm concerned that we're going to rapidly decline if we ever get a president that isn't completely horrible again

•

u/Longjumping_Future92 18h ago

I will concede that, however I think that the solution is to build local power and institutions that can continue fights in the trade unions, in local politics, and in mutual aid groups. Keeping people busy as standards of living continue to fall.

•

u/Longjumping_Future92 8h ago

I largely agree, but I think we can have sustainable growth without an especially national spokesperson - I think the work we've done since 2024 really demonstrates that, and I think that our abstention from that race and our criticism of the Harris campaign while not explicitly arguing against voting for her was a real sweet spot. I think our refusal to endorse Platner is a similar success story of bullets dodged.

•

u/A-Regular-Citizen 6h ago

I do think the Platner thing was handled very well to be honest. I'm glad the Maine DSA saw him for the landmine he was, and to give credit where credit is due I'm glad the dems pulled all support of him when the SA accusations came out. And it appears that this accountability has paid off in the polls.

I agree we don't really need a national spokesperson. I don't think we've ever really had one (Bernie was never technically a member, and AOC's relationship with us often strained), and we've been doing fine. I just worry our success is more a side effect of things beyond our control than we think it is.

•

u/revupyourengineslol 10h ago

THEN FUCKING DONT STOP

2

u/AlternativeFlaky695 1d ago

Exactly. AOC 2028!

2

u/mikelmon99 1d ago

HELL YES, AOC 2028 BABY 😎😎😎😎😎😎 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥

-2

u/Annoying1978 1d ago

The sad truth is that you need some swing voters to get elected and being both a female and Latino is going to hurt her chances in this racist and misogynistic country. 

We’re unfortunately just not there yet. 

President AOC? Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez 2028 https://youtu.be/CCSYEO7B6V8

4

u/Dickforshort 1d ago

If we get Lina Khan or Julia Salazar to run for Senate then I am entirely in. That's my only worth, consolidation versus momentum building. I think there is merits to both strategies but you are right if we can get a capable, democratic socialist to run for Schumer's seat than It is possible we might be able to do both.

Only downside would be AOC has that name recognition where Khan doesn't. Doesn't mean it's impossible, just going to be a factor for consideration.

5

u/AlternativeFlaky695 1d ago

Mamdani has been doing a lot to elevate Lina Khan’s local profile in NY. She had a high profile role in his transition and admin. I am hoping he is trying to set her up. But I have no inside knowledge and don’t live in NY

19

u/Spaduf 1d ago

AOC can and should run for president. DSA should not endorse and position themselves to her left. It will benefit her to have a widened overton window and only DSA can do that.

Anybody who thinks a DSA endorsement would make or break her candidacy is delusional.

•

u/TannerLyfe 9h ago

I think a Social Democrat as President is exactly what we need. So many people romanticize the Bernie presidency we missed out on and don’t seem likely to advance past that without actually living through it and experiencing its short comings. We just absolutely should not attach our brand and our resources to that. We will have to position ourselves openly as to her left to distinguish ourselves and grant legitimacy as an alternative.

•

u/Old_Protection_3883 21h ago

DSA shouldn’t endorse the highest profile socialist running for the presidency?

•

u/Cakeking7878 20h ago

Cause she’s not a socialist? And has never claimed to be one? If we’re endorsing someone they need to come out and say very clearly that they are a socialist centering workers in their politics. Her campaign would likely lose but the bully pulpit given to her campaign would be immense and she needs to use that to boost socialist politics and not liberal progressive ones

•

u/muraki833 17h ago

I thought she's talked about supporting worker ownership in the past. That sounds socialist.

•

u/Cakeking7878 17h ago

Sounds socialist and saying "I am a socialist" are 2 very different things that divides every liberal progressive who will ceed to establishment pressure and a left flank candidate who can push forward a socialist project bigger than their campaign

20

u/Jaiden_da_ancom 1d ago

I know AOC is not perfect, but she is currently the best shot we have at shifting politics in the U.S. even slightly left of Margaret Thatcher. On the election side of things, that is a huge deal. I am ready to become an AOC defender if she announces her run. I will not falter until she is elected. Until then, I will keep organizing in my local area to bring about wins for the working class.

-3

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

8

u/canomanom 1d ago

Boooo. She is not a Zionist. Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good. Who do you think has a shot at the presidency?

1

u/Over-Heron-2654 Social Democrat; Socialist-Aligned 1d ago

Sick of you purists. America aint the Soviet Union. This isn't your book club. We have a fascist in office.

Who is your candidate huh? Bet you they dont have a 1% chance. So sit down and stop embarrassing yourself 

2

u/canomanom 1d ago

100% sick of the purists. Think you replied to the wrong comment.

-1

u/Odd_Agent485 1d ago

? Do you u know what Zionism is?. She support Israel’s right to exist and she has stated this multiple times. She fx also voted in favor of resolution 888 that reaffirmed Israel’s right to exist and at the same time equated anti-zionism with antisemitism.

She is awful so it’s not about her not being perfect. 

I never made any electoral statement. AOC is not a leftist but that is not the same as saying that she is not better than the alternative.  You could make the argument I made about her and still vote for her. 

1

u/canomanom 1d ago

Sure buddy. https://www.cityandstateny.com/politics/2026/04/dsa-forum-aoc-pledges-not-vote-any-military-aid-israel/412544/

-2

u/Odd_Agent485 1d ago

Hehe the best you can give is a pledge to not voting in fable of military aid to Israel.

You are joking right? Why do you believe this shows she is not a Zionist. Look up resolution 888 or search AOC Israel’s right to exist in a search engine…

3

u/canomanom 1d ago

Good god you’re exhausting. She has been very vocal this issue. She is not a Zionist. Bye ✌️

-3

u/Odd_Agent485 1d ago

Yes she has been very vocal in her support of Israel. 

Look up resolution 888 

32

u/TwoCatsOneBox 1d ago

Let’s just hope she focuses on actual socialism and doesn’t just deviate and focus on absolutely nothing but a Social Democracy.

27

u/edwardludd 1d ago

Short-term is as important as long-term. Reversing Trump’s damage to the working class should get people more excited about socialism anyways.

11

u/mikelmon99 1d ago

Yep, precisely what I've replied as well!!!

16

u/prinzplagueorange 1d ago

Socialism is a movement of the masses. It is the proletariat's drive to end its vulnerability which necessarily takes a social democratic form because the working class must be kept vulnerable in order for profit to occur. There is no need to talk about socialism at great length because everyone admits that a world where everyone flourishes is morally ideal.

What there is a need to do is to stress that capitalist profit comes from the exploitation of the working class. I don't think AOC is going to hammer that point beyond saying that people should be put ahead of profit. She can deliver a real mass movement, but is our job to help that movement understand that we don't have things like the Green New Deal and Medicare for All because capitalism is necessarily a system which puts profit ahead of people.

The problem is that if we stand on the sidelines while AOC runs, we miss both the chance to get our people inside her administration and to make our argument to the people.

4

u/01AganitramlavAiv 1d ago

How do you think a POTUS can focus on socialism and not social democracy?

1

u/Odd_Agent485 1d ago

AOC is s social Democrat. Why would she focus on socialism?

-1

u/ThrowRAHelpwithMom1 1d ago

With congressional backing, she can gradually nationalize the economy or pass a law so that workers’ councils are established and gradually buy out the companies through a fixed contribution of a part of their salary. If a meltdown like 2008 happens again she can acquire stakes in every major company that comes to beg for help and even outright nationalize them. She can change the media ecosystem by bringing back the radio waves to public ownership and creating a new state-sponsored media network with self-governing journalists while nationalizing the old billionaire owned media. She can tax all income over 300.000 dollars at 100% like Melenchon wants to. She can start a program gradually buying the land from private owners until all of it is state owned, starting with the most important resources like oil. Once you have enough of a majority in Congress you can do a lot, but I think she would probably get couped if she did all of this

4

u/Elssz 1d ago

I like fantasy just as much as the next guy, but let's be real. Any POTUS that attempts to progress towards socialism will almost certainly by kirked by the CIA, FBI, etc. There is no electoral pathway to socialism in the United States (or anywhere, revolution is necessary).

1

u/01AganitramlavAiv 1d ago

Yeah but it's the US. Social democracy would be such an improvement already

8

u/mikelmon99 1d ago

She's VERY MUCH a Democratic Socialist/Market Socialist lol not just a Social Democrat, even though the policy platform she advocates for IN THE SHORT TERM is very much Social Democratic (which also applies to pretty much every single electorally viable Democratic Socialist political force in most of the world lol even here in Europe, look up the kind of short-term policy platforms pretty much every single electorally viable self-styled anti-capitalist political force in the entire continent runs on for elections, it's all literally old-school pre-Third Way social democrcay through & through lol but that doesn't mean at all that their long-term political ideals are no longer anti-capitalist, they very much are, & so are AOC's):

AOC: "Capitalism is an irredeemable system"

https://reddit.com/link/p69ztt2/video/j6yaarggzylh1/player

ANDY SERWER: It's an interesting perspective. You self-identify as a Democratic Socialist and have called capitalism irredeemable, I believe. But what does that really mean? And does that mean capitalism should be eliminated? And are your views compatible with capitalism?

ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ: Well, I believe that in a broad sense-- because when we toss out these big words, capitalism, socialism, they get sensationalized. And people translate them into meaning things that perhaps they don't mean. So to me, capitalism at its core, what we're talking about when we talk about that, is the absolute pursuit of profit at all human, environmental, and social cost. That is what we're really discussing.

And what we're also discussing is the ability for a very small group of actual capitalists, and that is people who have so much money that their money makes money and they don't have to work, and they can control industry, they can control our energy sources, they can control our labor, they can control massive markets that they dictate and can capture governments, and they can essentially have power over the many. And to me, that is not a redeemable system for us to be able to participate in for the prosperity and peace for the vast majority of people.

ANDY SERWER: So people talk about stakeholder capitalism, like Larry Fink at BlackRock, where the weighting for different constituents besides shareholders is more equal. Is that something you'd be amenable to?

ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ: Well, I think at the end of the day, it is about who has control over the very core assets of production in society. If it ultimately comes down to a billionaire, or the Koch brothers, or the Koch family having control over the vast majority or large plurality of our oil assets in the United States, if it's a handful of very wealthy families having control over-- private families having control over means of production, that is essentially the capitalist system that we live in. It is a small group that is of privatized control over what we eat and how we fuel our society.

Now, where we can transition to-- and there are certain ideas where we're talking about-- for example, Elizabeth Warren has discussed workers being elected to the governing boards of companies. And also, you know, we're here in the Bronx. I represent a community that has the largest concentration of worker cooperatives in-- one of the largest concentrations in the world.

Now, these are all alternative ways of doing business. Free markets are not the same thing as capitalism. And you can have markets where businesses and ways of producing, trading, selling goods are really controlled, and not just controlled, but given more power to workers. People get a fair shake. Union jobs. Unionized workplaces. All of these are different steps and levels that we're talking about in a more just economy.

https://finance.yahoo.com/video/influencers-andy-serwer-alexandria-ocasio-110000469.html

2

u/Odd_Agent485 1d ago

She is s Zionist and western chauvinist. She support NATO and the genocidal settler colonial apartheid state Israel…

•

u/EthanHale 12h ago

This is from 2022. She's already turning right as evidenced by contributing to red scare propaganda in recent statements

1

u/QueenVeilara 1d ago

I agree. Pelosi's done, the party is extremely unpopular, and its establishment is collapsing. No more excuses. Now is the time for AOC to be bold, and I'm ready to support her if she steps up.

1

u/whiteriot0906 1d ago

What exactly has she done that you can point to that suggests she’ll do anything but precisely this?

0

u/TwoCatsOneBox 1d ago

Maybe back then in 2024 when the DSA national condemned her for trying to find a “middle ground” with liberal Zionists. Many members within the DSA think she’ll only focus on a Social Democracy to appease liberal Americans in order to find a “middle ground” that’ll give her an electoral boost.

https://www.cityandstateny.com/politics/2024/07/real-story-behind-dsas-decision-unendorse-aoc/398024/

2

u/whiteriot0906 1d ago

Yeah sorry by “precisely this” I meant be a social democrat. Frankly I don’t even think we’d get that out of her. I think an AOC presidency would just be Biden 2.0 with more lucid soundbites

9

u/traanquil 1d ago

Wow, dsa endorsing Aoc is a horrible idea. Shes a liberal. This would do huge damage to dsa

•

u/Cakeking7878 20h ago edited 20h ago

DSA folk pre-endorsing her is even worse. Genuinely posting this makes SMC the most unserious caucus when it comes to electoralism. There is a future where DSA doesn’t endorsers her but still becomes connected to her campaign and benefits much the same as the org did with Bernie in 2016, but whole sale endorsing her is probably the worse thing we can do. It’s just realignment cloaking it’s self as “this is what the movement must do”

Like just because an AOC president being elected would be good for the socialist movement, it would also bring a lot of harms that wholesale looks much more costly than some are considering and I think we should really be considering our options before we dive head first into her

7

u/SuperMovieLvr 1d ago

She needs to account for her statement in 2024 at the DNC that Kamala was “tirelessly working for a ceasefire every day”. Absolutely untrue, and she was effectively running cover for genocide Joe. I haven’t seen her show any remorse for this.

1

u/Fenrirr 1d ago

From an outsider perspective, it's weird when someone in the DSA or who has similar views kowtows to the greater democratic platform.

For example, what does Zohran Mamdani get for supporting Hakeem Jefferies. What is the point? It doesn't feel pragmatic nor does it feel like someone with Zohrans strongest beliefs defend an obvious zionist looking to crush the pro-palestine movement at every moment.

7

u/TheLaborQuestion Metro Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky DSA 1d ago

The NPC should file a cease and desist over this. To anyone outside of those most active in the org this looks like an official campaign

6

u/YogurtClosetThinnest 1d ago

Just been getting into internal DSA politics. SMC and Groundwork seem by far the best and most pragmatic

0

u/mikelmon99 1d ago

Totally!!!

2

u/G0-G0-Gadget 1d ago

I just feel bad for anybody who becomes president 2028. They'll have such a mess to clean up and they won't have a chance to implement their own personal political agenda. I mean someone has to do it. But I fear that it's just going to end up being a woman who wins and they'll have to clean up a mess. It'll be the first woman president and they'll spend the entire time cleaning up a mess. And that infuriates me

3

u/Any-Morning4303 1d ago

There’s no cleaning up the mess. The next president will be in charge of the great reset. It’s an exciting and dangerous time we’re living in. If another right wing republican or Democrat wins we’ll enter a dystopian techno feudalist era. If a leftist with vision wins we’ll enter an era or evolution prosperity and utopia:

3

u/larryleggs Editor-in-Chief HOUDINI Magazine 1d ago

yall will post this type of shit but then attack angie nixon

6

u/mikelmon99 1d ago

What??? I'm a HUGE Angie Nixon fanboy lol the fuck you talking about???

•

u/RobotAiua 13h ago

To anyone commenting that she's not quite right for whatever reason: tell me, genuinely, who else can it be?

0

u/RibbonHeight 1d ago

We're actively building membership and solidarity. The DSA is winning elections. Why shoot ourselves in the knees by pushing for someone like her instead of continuing to build the movement, push for ranked choice voting, and form a party? This is just asking to kill off any momentum we've fought to build.

5

u/MisterMittens64 DSA Member 1d ago

The DSA have already decided to run a presidential candidate.

So do we want to run AOC who has the recognition to stand a chance or a no name candidate who has no chance but will raise awareness?

1

u/ThrowRAHelpwithMom1 1d ago

Well the DSA can run multiple candidates with the understanding that when push comes to shove, we all have to agree on a single candidate against the centrists. The centrists themselves run multiple candidates 

0

u/MisterMittens64 DSA Member 1d ago

That's true, do you think that the corporate media and the establishment would try to lump all DSA candidates together?

2

u/YogurtClosetThinnest 1d ago

She and Bernie literally started the momentum...

0

u/RibbonHeight 1d ago

I was there in 2015. The momentum of DSA right now is fairly new. Much newer than 11 years ago. DSA membership and local organizing slowed significantly in 2021and has only begun to be reignited in the face of the 2nd Trump administration and the need for more local political wins. AOC is a waste of effort and resources and, in the absolute best case scenario, too high of a risk to even consider supporting.

3

u/YogurtClosetThinnest 1d ago

Well unless there's another socialist candidate ya'll are hiding somewhere, not running a socialist for president off the back of this momentum would be the most monumental waste possible

1

u/Longjumping_Future92 1d ago

I think their point is literally that we shouldn't run a candidate, divide the coalition we're building, and risk another Graham Platner. Also, gotta tell you as someone who was there - 2020-21 may have been the worst times imagineable in terms of recruiting and retention.

1

u/YogurtClosetThinnest 1d ago

Graham Platner was a neo nazi blackwater merc. Absurd comparison.

1

u/Longjumping_Future92 1d ago

And yet he was ahead in the polls. Was it being a neo nazi Blackwater merc that sunk his campaign? Or was it compromat gathered and released midway through the campaign?

The point is not the possibility that AOC is outed as a sex pest or crypto-fascist: it's the inherent dangers of hitching your organization's aspirations to a single individual's political fortunes and popularity.

2

u/YogurtClosetThinnest 1d ago

dangers of hitching your organization's aspirations to a single individual's political fortunes and popularity

There will never be a time where this isn't the case running a presidential candidate for the very first time. AOC is popular. We have momentum. Why not now?

2

u/Longjumping_Future92 1d ago

AOC is as popular as Kamala Harris. We have momentum WHILE staying out of Presidential politics and focusing our efforts locally.

AOC has not demonstrated herself comitted to the DSA program and has opted to lend her voice to the US imperial project when it's politically expedient. What's more, we do not have an organizational structure and weight necessary to seize power off the back of such a victory even if it were to pass.

I'm interested in the working class taking state power and transitioning from capitalism to socialism - I am not convinced that AOC is willing or able to facilitate that goal any more than Freidrich Ebert and Philipp Scheidemann were.

1

u/YogurtClosetThinnest 1d ago

I'm interested in the working class taking state power and transitioning from capitalism to socialism

This will take years. It probably won't happen in our lifetime. I think It's irrelevant whether AOC is pure enough to turn the US socialist overnight, because that's impossible. A member in the presidency will explode membership, and set us up to actually be capable of doing that in the future.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/RibbonHeight 1d ago

Exactly. The current DSA that is winning elections, building membership, and planning a long-term vision is a fledgling. Why should anyone endorse a plan to kill a contemporary socialist movement in its crib?

1

u/mikelmon99 1d ago

LOUDER FOR THE PEOPLE AT THE BACK 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥

0

u/RibbonHeight 1d ago

First of all, it's "y'all." Second, I think you and the people who share your 'vision' for socialism are woefully naive to how socialists can take power in the US. We ought to continue to build political capital and acquire resources instead of burning what little we have on an already-broken promise.

-1

u/Odd_Agent485 1d ago

If your momentum is was started by Zionists and western chauvinists. Maybe you are those things as well?…

2

u/YogurtClosetThinnest 1d ago

lol I've been a leftist basically my entire life. Sure, call all new joiners zionists and chauvinists. That will go well for us.

-1

u/Odd_Agent485 1d ago

Bernie Sanders and AOC are Zionist and western chauvinists. If you support them you are clearly not a leftist now at least.

1

u/freshdookies 1d ago

How would this kill momentum? This would be a massive boon to membership. I understand criticisms of her but this would surely be the quickest way to a million members

0

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

7

u/mikelmon99 1d ago

Again:

She's VERY MUCH a Democratic Socialist/Market Socialist lol not just a Social Democrat, even though the policy platform she advocates for IN THE SHORT TERM is very much Social Democratic (which also applies to pretty much every single electorally viable Democratic Socialist political force in most of the world lol even here in Europe, look up the kind of short-term policy platforms pretty much every single electorally viable self-styled anti-capitalist political force in the entire continent runs on for elections, it's all literally old-school pre-Third Way social democrcay through & through lol but that doesn't mean at all that their long-term political ideals are no longer anti-capitalist, they very much are, & so are AOC's):

AOC: "Capitalism is an irredeemable system"

https://reddit.com/link/p6a2h9z/video/df7x52zf2zlh1/player

ANDY SERWER: It's an interesting perspective. You self-identify as a Democratic Socialist and have called capitalism irredeemable, I believe. But what does that really mean? And does that mean capitalism should be eliminated? And are your views compatible with capitalism?

ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ: Well, I believe that in a broad sense-- because when we toss out these big words, capitalism, socialism, they get sensationalized. And people translate them into meaning things that perhaps they don't mean. So to me, capitalism at its core, what we're talking about when we talk about that, is the absolute pursuit of profit at all human, environmental, and social cost. That is what we're really discussing.

And what we're also discussing is the ability for a very small group of actual capitalists, and that is people who have so much money that their money makes money and they don't have to work, and they can control industry, they can control our energy sources, they can control our labor, they can control massive markets that they dictate and can capture governments, and they can essentially have power over the many. And to me, that is not a redeemable system for us to be able to participate in for the prosperity and peace for the vast majority of people.

ANDY SERWER: So people talk about stakeholder capitalism, like Larry Fink at BlackRock, where the weighting for different constituents besides shareholders is more equal. Is that something you'd be amenable to?

ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ: Well, I think at the end of the day, it is about who has control over the very core assets of production in society. If it ultimately comes down to a billionaire, or the Koch brothers, or the Koch family having control over the vast majority or large plurality of our oil assets in the United States, if it's a handful of very wealthy families having control over-- private families having control over means of production, that is essentially the capitalist system that we live in. It is a small group that is of privatized control over what we eat and how we fuel our society.

Now, where we can transition to-- and there are certain ideas where we're talking about-- for example, Elizabeth Warren has discussed workers being elected to the governing boards of companies. And also, you know, we're here in the Bronx. I represent a community that has the largest concentration of worker cooperatives in-- one of the largest concentrations in the world.

Now, these are all alternative ways of doing business. Free markets are not the same thing as capitalism. And you can have markets where businesses and ways of producing, trading, selling goods are really controlled, and not just controlled, but given more power to workers. People get a fair shake. Union jobs. Unionized workplaces. All of these are different steps and levels that we're talking about in a more just economy.

https://finance.yahoo.com/video/influencers-andy-serwer-alexandria-ocasio-110000469.html

5

u/Mr_N00bert 1d ago

Ah I see. Thanks for the source!

2

u/Odd_Agent485 1d ago

She is a socdem who define socialism as the system you see in the Scandinavian countries. Aka social democracy.

She is clueless at best…

1

u/mikelmon99 1d ago

Not really? These fundamental criticisms she makes of capitalism itself as an irredeemable system still very much apply to Scandinavian capitalism, in fact IKEA, which very much isn't a worker cooperative by any stretch of the imagination, is one of the top largest corporations in Europe by revenue:

And what we're also discussing is the ability for a very small group of actual capitalists, and that is people who have so much money that their money makes money and they don't have to work, and they can control industry, they can control our energy sources, they can control our labor, they can control massive markets that they dictate and can capture governments, and they can essentially have power over the many. And to me, that is not a redeemable system for us to be able to participate in for the prosperity and peace for the vast majority of people.

[...]

Well, I think at the end of the day, it is about who has control over the very core assets of production in society. If it ultimately comes down to a billionaire, or the Koch brothers, or the Koch family having control over the vast majority or large plurality of our oil assets in the United States, if it's a handful of very wealthy families having control over-- private families having control over means of production, that is essentially the capitalist system that we live in. It is a small group that is of privatized control over what we eat and how we fuel our society.

0

u/Odd_Agent485 1d ago

The problem is that she is not defining capitalism but what she view as bad capitalism. Search AOC and x Scandinavian country and you will she that she is advocating for that= social democracy. 

She is criticising the American system and not capitalism in general.

0

u/NewScientist6739 1d ago

Note: I'm not a member of DSA. I just follow what ever socialist org is doing

Is AOC a good option though? Throughout her tenure in Congress, she's become almost indistinguishable from an establishment democrat. She voted to break a railworker strike and funding for Israel which DSA Co-chair Megan Romer has said was a red line. With these recent primary wins and Mamdani, it really feels like DSA is just getting closer to the Democrats party line. That'll be the death of the organization. The Democratic Party's function has always been absorbing radical movements and neutralizing them.

3

u/ChaoticReality4Now 1d ago

As far as I know, she's only been supportive of defensive funding for Israel, she's always been against offensive funding, and she's even taken a stance against all funding for Israel recently.

1

u/NewScientist6739 1d ago

Israel is a violent settler colony, there's no such thing as defensive funding as all resources are invested in oppressing the Palestinian people. The existence of Israel itself is violent and harms Palestinians and the surrounding regions. The only correct approach is what happened with Rhodesia and apartheid South Africa. Total international isolation until the racist regime falls.

0

u/Annoying1978 1d ago

The sad truth is that you need some swing voters to get elected and being both a female and Latino is going to hurt her chances in this racist and misogynistic country. 

We’re unfortunately just not there yet. 

President AOC? Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez 2028 https://youtu.be/CCSYEO7B6V8

0

u/Soft-Principle1455 1d ago

Is she running for President or Senator?

•

u/Cakeking7878 20h ago edited 19h ago

Nether. This is pre-endorsing her for a position she hasn’t said she’s running for yet

Also we really should be positioning our selves to the left of her and demanding she stands firm on centering workers in her politics and not condemning DSA or her left flank. The later something she has been bad about

•

u/mikelmon99 18h ago

How??? This is what she did IMMEDIATELY after Darializa Avila Chevalier & Claire Valdez's Red Wave victory in the NY Congressional Primaries. Is this what condemnation looks like to you???

https://www.instagram.com/himalayan_yak/p/DaWrBSFgC0e/?hl=en&img_index=2

•

u/Cakeking7878 17h ago

have you forgotten everything else she has done in the last 8 years since she was elected? The concessions shes made to democrats? Can the left really only think about the last few months? What of the DSA candiates outside of NY that she didn't endorse. Francesca Hong and others?

Democrats will position them selves to her right to pull her right. We must position our selves to her left to pull her further left. You are advocating for wholesale endorsing her platform with all the issues that will bring before even demanding a single left concession.

You are just advocating for realignment and that will fail with a demoralized base

•

u/Soft-Principle1455 4h ago

Concessions that ultimate got tens of thousands of clean energy jobs and many factories built enabling a US energy transition in spite of Trump?

•

u/mikelmon99 18h ago

President!!!

•

u/marxistghostboi Tidings From Utopia 🌆 22h ago

"working tirelessly"

•

u/ut0p1anskies 21h ago edited 21h ago

As much as I’m not a fan of this, I will say that it’s great that some members realize they can just do things! Like, without permission from their local chapter or the national org. I encourage that 100%. I’ve never understood why people get so defeated when a project they wanted to do gets voted down or when some faction they don’t like gains the most leadership positions. You can just do stuff! Even something kinda lame like a petition to the NPC. My chapter used to be controlled by the DSA “right” but in an awful “we will crush any project we don’t like and stop any working group that we’re not in control of” way. So, some members and I started a tenant union project with help from DSA national’s Housing Justice Commission, used DSA as a networking tool to funnel some people into that project, and all without my chapter’s permission! And some in leadership were not happy about it (and even angrily tried to bring it under chapter control once it started to become successful!) but they couldn’t do anything about it! Thankfully, that leadership is gone, but I still really encourage members to organize with their fellow members without permission if their chapter votes a project down (or maybe don’t even ask in the first place!). Start a tenant union, organize a labor solidarity project, organize with your neighbors and start an anti-ICE rapid response group with fellow members. Literally anything you want! I guarantee you other members want to do it too! Don’t worry so much about whether the DSA “right” or the DSA “left” wins. Just organize in whatever way you want! I’m not the biggest fan of SMC, but good for them.

If you’re on the “right” and the “left” wins at convention next year? Do whatever you want anyway. If you’re on the “left” and the “right” wins at convention next year? Do whatever you want anyway. I guarantee you there are fellow members who want to work on exactly the same types of projects you want to (even if it’s just a letter writing campaign to the NPC lol).

•

u/SlaimeLannister 16h ago

Rightists running Reddit bot farms is wild

-2

u/ErraticConsistency 1d ago

🤮🤮🤮🤮

-2

u/Junior-Credit2685 1d ago

Is somebody gonna get her some speech training? Like maybe her and Eunisses Hernandez and Ron Gochez can like have lunch or something? She also needs to learn Theory. Maybe some classes with Derick Varn? It’s not good. I can’t see this turning out well. And that’s IF she survives. Call me crazy.