This vibes anecdotally with my local chapter. In the face of overwhelming membership solidarity with Palestinian liberation, the social imperialist reactionaries are purging themselves.
This vibes anecdotally with my local chapter. In the face of overwhelming membership solidarity with Palestinian liberation, the social imperialist reactionaries are purging themselves.
(emphasis mine)
I remember being confused about this language in the sample new-chapter bylaws when I was trying to help form a chapter in my town! Our organizing committee really didn't care about this language and removed it from our original submission, but we were told it was required. I asked the others on the organizing committee about it and didn't get an explanation, just "oh well, it doesn't apply to any of us anyway, who cares," but now I finally get it. It also makes some of the tension on the forums make a little more sense.
Edit - so, as I continued reading, I was struck by something that seemed a little contradictory, but maybe I'm thinking about this the wrong way? He's celebrating all these tens of thousands of young people joining DSA just because it's big and has "socialist" in the name - not because they inherently care about DSA, but just because they liked what Bernie had to say politically and wanted to group up with other people with similar politics. He's also simultaneously bemoaning the large but mysterious number of multi-org people joining DSA because it's big and looks like a place to group up with other people with similar politics.
Am I just totally not understanding? I get that I'm oversimplifying a little bit here, but basically: he's mad that the second group is loud, active, growing in popularity, and doesn't share his politics?
It kinda comes across like the jealous, shitty partner who is mad about anybody giving you any kind of positive attention, especially your wonderful friend with the giant crush on you. What if you realize you have more in common with them and leave?!? They found you first, fair and square - you're in Isserman's DSA now, and it's not okay for other orgs to look at you or talk to you!
Edit 2: are other orgs like this? is this common? DSA is the only org I've been in. I've been wanting another, but my first experience sucked enough that joining another seems daunting.
This sentence in his bio also makes me 🤔
Same deal here. Working on chapter bylaws, ran into the clause nobody could explain. “Don’t worry about it”, but “National says it has to stay”. As my political education grew it became clear that, far from a “leftist big tent”, DSA was always designed to be an explicitly pro-US anticommunist organization. I left after the Bowman affair the expulsion of the i
nternational committeePalestine Solidarity Working Group. The old permanent self appointed chapter leadership has since come out in favor of sending arms to Ukraine, and came out against the local Palestine solidarity rally because it was “infiltrated by the PSL”.That's when I finally gave up on DSA for good. What's the point of getting these clowns elected there's no party line and no discipline? If I wanted to knock on doors for liberals, I'd join ActBlue or whatever
What happened? I havent kept up I guess. The international committee seemed great.
They were, in fact cool, which is why they harshly criticized Bowman for voting to send Israel money for the Iron Dome and went on a visit to Israel.
The working group demanded that he break ties with Zionist lobbyists like J Street which sponsored the trip. Bowman refused. The working group demanded that DSA begin the process of expelling Bowman.
DSA National Leadership pissed its pants and dechartered the working group
Actually, you know what I hate that I know all this shit. I'm going to forget it right fucking now
One of the members of the disbanded working group, Ahmed Husain, was elected to DSA's national political committee.
I remembered incorrectly: it was the Palestine solidarity/BGS workgroup that got dechartered around the time of the Bowman affair. I recall pretty continuous calls for the expulsion of the IC at the time, and it got conflated in my memory.
The author is whining because the MLs had an actual agenda and direction they wanted to push for and the Bernie fans just wanted to get behind anything saying free healthcare.
The by-law technically isnt a prohibition on dem-cents but does mean you can be kicked at any time if you are. Weirdly phrased but its meant to prevent some dem cent org from hijacking the org.
But regardless. The author is mad that these so called vocal minorities picked an issue that was extremely popular with the new base.
So it is a prohibition on effective demcent
Wrong, its a prohibition on multiple demcent factions splintering the org like they did with SDS.
You'd like to imagine you're ML faction should be at them helm but then you learn there's also a maoist faction and half a dozen trostskite factions who think differently. So its either get along or get the wall.
edit: "effective demcent" would just be to be demcent.
Oh, so the organization can just be turned demcent without this factoring in? If your thesis had the slightest bearing, you'd think the policy would be oriented toward reconciliation for the sake of big tent politics instead of just terminating chapters, since you can't merely make the whole org demcent with the wave of a wand, nor can you be ideologically neutral in the developmental stages, meaning any attempt at demcent can be very easily cast as splitting.
At what point was I advocating for making DSA demcent? The rule prevents any demcents from making a coup attempt so being a hazard for them if they succeed is a positive. Its like a corporate poison pill clause enforcing the holy command: Thou shalt not splinter the org.
PS
Tone down the debate bro energy
So then it is anti-demcent
In the fact that it is not demcent and has rules to prevent it from becoming demcent. You can still be demcent and be in DSA. There are literal demcent caucuses in the DSA. The article is basically the author complaining about those caucuses.
You have still agreed to what I am saying, aside from an apparent equivocation between groups having demcent ideology versus being structurally demcent. Can you point to a segment of the DSA that is openly structurally demcent and not a 5 person book club?
You didn't define "anti-demcent" and it sounded loaded. Again, turn down the debate bro vibes.
There are full caucuses in the DSA that are demcent. Either ideologically or structurally I dont know. Few have their own websites and fewer still openly talk about their internal structure (for reference even the PSL doesn't say its demcent on its about page). But there's many guides to all the different caucuses.
The last one is interesting because it shows you the makeup of the 2021 convention delegates. If you scroll through you'll see at least one delegate from Socialist Alternative which is an external demcent org. Reform and Revolution is allegedly a breakaway from Socialist Alternative so its probably also demcent.