This is how ideological creep happens. Allowing elements in because you think you can control them or that the compromise is worth it and before you realise it's too late to stop the fact that you've become a bourgeoise party.
This is right-opportunism, in the Marxist-Leninist sense, in literal action.
All in the name of "building a more inclusive democratic socialist movement" with imperialist lickspittles doing the work of the capitalist class while wearing socialist masks
Yep. It's extremely concerning for the longevity of the party(notparty).
Worse yet, when leadership does this kind of thing they are teaching their entire base that this is the right thing to do. That has knock on effects as members will advocate it again in future, and even carry it to other parties if this one caves in eventually. It incorrectly educates.
Jesus Christ. American orgs have the party discipline of a wet fucking noodle. I know DSA isn't a party but god, why doesn't the DSA have a whip yet and why isn't support for Palestine a three-liner?
Because DSA recognizes that they don't actually have the power to hold any of "their" politicians to account. For someone who is already in office, that's not much of a threat. Expulsion from the DSA would have no impact on their holding a seat, because they aren't subject to a party list system of any sort. At the end of the day, the DSA's only actual leverage is their endorsement, and it isn't a particularly effective lever. The problem is in the entrepreneurial relationship between party and legislator that FPTP democracies with a weak-party model create. It's important to understand that there is structure to the DSA's weakness - it isn't just born of foolishness.
Yeah Bowman's endorsement was basically a rush job 3 weeks before his election. Paid off massively in PR until the the past month. IMO the NPC made the tough but correct position. Expulsion is not a punishment any more un-endorsement is in terms of DSA affecting Bowman's campaign, and expelling right now could have made building a stronger party more difficult in the near term (don't totally buy that, but it's not unreasonable, enough for me to be okay with the decision).
What's going to happen is that the national electoral committee is not going to endorse any federal office candidate who doesn't hit the platform points again (rightfully). This is the first time a real burn has happened with the federal reps, everyone knew this was going to happen eventually. It's the reason every chapter is now copying NYC DSA's endorsement questionnaire practice more diligently.
Oh, I know. But if there's ever going to be a socialist movement in the USA, a strong disciplined org is needed that can and will ruin the lives of any rep that goes against the line, either in electoral or direct work. Otherwise, we may as well embrace Third-Worldism and ask Xi to launch the nukes already.
Not DemCent, per se, but at least UK Labour if not AU Labor levels of discipline. I know that's harder without a party list. But there are other means, like having masses of protesters haunt their every waking moment.
Can the DSA be built up to this level, and if not...what good is it if the reps it endorses openly flout it's political positions without consequence?
This was a tough call in part because Bowman held these positions before DSA endorsed him, not after. It's not like DSA endorsed him and he swung right after getting in office. That raises the question of "why did they endorse in the first place", which - fair question.
It's also true that Bowman's view on this issue is the same as that of Bernie Sanders, whom DSA made their chief electoral priority last cycle. Expelling Bowman for having the same position would raise questions of a racial double standard.
I'm not saying this was the right decision; I was originally pro-expulsion but after talking to comrades in my org who opposed it I came to at least respect the viewpoint. It's not just lib shit / caping.
Definitely hope DSA pulls an endorsement though. I don't want dues going towards his campaign when there are better candidates in tougher electoral campaigns out there plus plenty of non-electoral work to do. I care a lot more about pulling financial support than expulsion.
He did say he did not support BDS, however he did retroactively flip flop in the initial endorsement regarding funding Israel.
I don’t want dues going towards his campaign
No dues have ever gone to any political campaign actually technically (staff time may get some liason assigned, but we can't give campaigns money). In fact we can't spend more than 40 percent of our budget on anything electoral or the feds shut us down for violating the 501 c 3 laws.
Good points all. Not enough to change my position, but yes, I understand they're trying to thread a difficult needle.
Yeah I'm torn. DSA is essentially working to make socdem demands as a theory of change that helping workers win demands will illuminate the promise of uniting as workers. It's kind of undeniable that expelling Bowman (and theoretically Bernie for not publicly endorsing BDS, eventually AOC for her 'present' vote) will weaken the left as an entity in DC. I guess the question comes down to "what is the point of DC politics" which I'm still trying to answer myself.
But honestly I don't have any faith in PSL as an alternative 'more radical' option to be the most influential left org in the US. I would prefer to have DSA be an imperfect 'big tent' :visible-disgust: org that primarily helps unions through solidarity campaigns, but also pushes for things like the PRO act, M4A etc. I can't help but think this is the only option we have, considering how awfully organized & class conscious the US working class is. In other words, I think DSA is only as powerful as the working class, which is to say NOT powerful. We're at a stage where the demands we're able to make through the org are extremely limited by this. This is what I think when people criticize DSA for making cringe moves. This is all we can do right now, and I think we should be careful about squandering the little power we do have.
There was a very interesting thread on Twitter about similar issues Lula faced in Brazil, I'll link if I find it. Online lefties are typically extremely pro-Lula, but people seem to not understand how much awful right-wing coalition building he did. And he did so to stay in power, to extract wins for the working class. So it seems hypocritical to criticize DSA and be uncritically pro-Lula. If you're one of these people, please share why I'm wrong. :lula-bars:
So yeah, all this to say I have no idea where I stand. I'm also not super clued in. But I think not expelling, instead not re-endorsing is an acceptable move.
EDIT: I swing hard between Bernstein and Lenin on a daily basis, please don't crucify me too hard for my right-wing take today. BDS forever of course, liberate Palestine in our lifetime :palestine-strong:
I think Lenin would define the DSA as a Bourgois Workers Party(notparty) like UK Labour in 1900. Worth supporting, but only if communists have full political freedom to agitate about its weaknesses from inside.
Which we do.
Yeah I think you're right on the first point. Lenin taught me so much, but I still struggle with how much to / how much not to apply Lenin to our own context.
I used to read Lenin and go "haha he's talking about DSA cucks" but that changed when I actually started doing DSA organizing work. I'm under no illusion that "DSA can establish communism" or whatever, but in my city and my situation, we are organized in doing great and valuable labor solidarity work as well as political education. And I find that lots of online leftist's takeaways are that "lol you're in DSA but Lenin said you're a cuck" but I found that to be an incredibly demobilizing sentiment personally. I'm happy staying kinda ideologically agnostic on this because I've directly seen how useful DSA can be for labor.
I don't agree with you that DSA is only useful because communists have freedom to agitate. Considering how weak the working class is currently it seems a bit like a destructive ultra left position to me. And I struggle to even picture what that would look like, there really hasn't been any moment in the discussion meetings I've attended where I've been like "actually DSA is doomed and we need to be Leninists." In fact many comrades would probably agree with the criticisms of its contradictions.
And also let's be real, if you're organizing labor, much of that labor will be American boomers. I'm really just interested in growing people's class consciousness and hoping to push people to learn about socialist labor politics OF ANY FORM really. Maybe that's besides the point idk.
Yes, we seem to forget that while left-wing orgs were around the same size in the 1890s-1900s, there was significantly more stochastic worker violence and unorganised labour action than we see, and unions were much stronger. The base was far more conscious.
We're getting to that point (for better or worse), but I agree that as long as you're willing to highlight weaknesses and contradictions in a DemSoc org, and where possible agitate for a more hard line stance you're doing ok.
Yeah. Ultimately I think we're all disgusted by Bowman's actions, and it seems like a vast majority think it was a mistake to endorse him at all.
Out of curiosity are you a member / active in DSA? (Not a fed) :fedposting:
No, wrong continent. Unfortunately, to a first approximation, everyone not in AES lives in America, they just have radically different experiences of what that means.
Ehhh, what causes Manchins is being from a state that votes Republican by 50 points. Manchin votes like a conservative because literally a third of his voters are Trumpers.
In a sense, yes. The Democrats have no real power over Manchin's ability to get elected, so if they did want to bring him to heel, they couldn't. But they also don't want to, so it doesn't really matter that much that they can't bring him to heel. Now, the loose relationship between party and representative helped to create the structural elements of the party system that gives the Democratic elite the interests they have, so, in that sense, still yes. But, realistically, that's of minimal importance compared to understanding the historical material interests of the American elite of different periods and recognizing that their interests are what drive both parties. The entrepreneurial model of politics makes it easier for economic elites to control American politicians, but you don't need a system as thoroughly malformed as the American one to produce similar outcomes. PR governments with strong-party models have seen similar outcomes, if in less extreme forms.
They have plenty of party discipline. The DSA is telling you something loud and clear about what their party stands for, and you should listen to them!
So is there any American leftist political organization with any teeth because I get the feeling more and more that we need a proper socialist party here. I’m just so tired of half hearted :LIB: bullshit
All 4 of their members who passed vetting are very committed, it's true.
Hey, Empire Files and it's production team are a great organization.
plenty of small communist/socialist parties that have teeth, but when you're in the imperial core, it's not surprising that the most lib "Socialist" party, DSA, gets the most membership with the Sanders campaign. Most American leftists just care about free health care and college, anti-imperialism is far at the bottom.
lol to be consistent it should have been the reverse: expel but still consider endorsing since the DSA membership is very cool with endorsing libs (a tendency we should fight against).
There are two camps within the right wing of the organization that hold a lot of sway still. Both thoroughly anti-communist. One is the old guard who are just run of the mill democrats. The other is a mix of electoralists who are very well organized and generally successful in what they do, but they are more interested in building a coalition "party" (in the broadest sense of the term) with other progressive organizations than laying a correct, revolutionary line. They are also in control of most of the chapters in New York. It's why so many DSA endorsed candidates are discussed as if they were party cadre when in reality DSA is just one more org that endorsed them. Until we enforce some dem-cent around the platform nothing is going to change, which is why if you're a member you should run for your chapter's delegation to the national convention in two years and push for that sort of thing at your local in the meantime.
Until we enforce some dem-cent around the platform
Dem-Cent around the platform will result in the Old Guard and the Electoralists completely expelling anyone vaguely Communist or Anarchist from the DSA lol. Like you just said that the Bowman stans control all the chapters in NY, how the fuck do you think a "mass line" is gonna look like at this time?
tbh, the open threat regarding endorsements was more than I expected from the NPC on this. That's a much harder line than they have traditionally taken, for all that it isn't a particularly hard one.
Political figures/orgs who retweet people just saying generic supportive shit of them is so fucking embarrasing.
Like what, you need to convince your followers that you have support? Jesus.
I haven't been following, but didn't AOC cast the same vote? Is she under review too?
AOC voted present - did not vote in favor or against the Iron Dome money. But this outcry against Bowman is more about that he took a propaganda trip to Israel with a liberal Zionist organization, not one single vote.
DSA reprimanded AOC for her vote on Iron Dome.
