While I think the members of Red Star mean well and their faction generally has good positions, I've gotta push back on the idea that they've significantly pushed DSA's international work broadly or their anti-zionist work specifically in a better direction. The recent gutting of the anti-zionist resolution by the NPC and the retraction of the statements on the Venezuelan election and the Israeli assassination in Iran show that at the highest level DSA is firmly in control of chauvinist social democrats on these issues (I had to scoff when I heard of the "left" NPC getting elected last year, as if Bread and Roses are left lol)
Furthermore, DSA's position on the presidential election has always been firmly invested in working within the Democratic party as seen by their focus on the "uncommitted" movement and their recent statement about Harris picking Walz as her VP. They still hide in their dirty break/party surrogate position which functionally ends up the same as the CP's line.
There are a lot of good people in DSA and I learned a lot when I was a member but the organization is fundamentally repelled by any sort of discipline and the social fascists on it's right wing maintain their power through that disorder and have demonstated that they do not care if their opportunism harms the organization or anyone else for that matter. Changing it into something viable would take an immense amount of work that would be sabotaged by SMC/Groundwork/B&R every step of the way, or you could just join an actual Leninist org.
It's moving left though? Certainly not fast enough to meet this revolutionary moment but it is.
The less tut-tutty stuff barely failed, which I would call progress, it sucks that that is where it is at but movement is happening.
It sounds like you haven't pulled them left at all but failed by a narrower margin at pulling them left at all.
How is failing by a narrower margin not pulling them left if it's people voting?
If ten people vote for some leftist proposal and it fails, but then next year 20 people vote for some leftist proposal and it fails...is that not pulling that group to the left?
Wake me up when something, even the slightest pittance, is actually achieved in the DSA's policy, because the DSA as an organization has not moved left until its policy is affected.
Their statement was a little different, the potential policy differences were gutted.
That's just a minor quantitative change. There's no qualitative change.
dialectical materialism posits that qualitative changes occur through the accumulation of quantitative changes- for example, adding grains of sand will eventually produce a pile of sand- I think this runs contrary to what they're trying to argue though, so maybe I'm incorrect in what they're referencing.
I mean, tut tutting israel is actually pulling them left- it used to be a lot worse, and there is value in having DSA not be actively zionist. It isn't like DSA is tut tutting but then also shipping bombs to Israel.
It isn't like DSA is tut tutting but then also shipping bombs to Israel.
The DSA is tut-tutting Israel and then campaigning for the Dems, who are shipping bombs to Israel.
How do you stop the right factions from doing that? Stay out of the fight because the right factions are terrible? Like, 2/5s of the DSA right now is a way of deradicalizing folks back into supporting the democrats. It used to be almost all of the DSA, like how CPUSA is captured by democrats.
I think people are disillusioned by bourgeoise democracy and don't understand that the DSA has an actual democracy because they see DSA being shitty and assume it is irrevocably captured. The right faction aren't that connected to the democrats, it is more of a "notice me senpai" relationship where some of the leadership want NGO positions, and the right leadership's hold of their membership is really tenuous because they aren't actually invested in organizing their membership, they're interested in mobilizing to prove that they're good mobilizers to democrats, putting them at a massive long term disadvantage which we're exploiting.
See, now that's a much stronger claim. As I said to another poster, wake me up when you've actually won something, that will be good evidence. As it is now, at least without hard numbers, it's observationally identical to cope. It's up to you lot, if you are interested, to produce phenomena that could only be the case if you are right and there is a powerful enough radical constituency. Until then, it will plainly be the better answer for the rest of us that we should focus on organizations that don't require coups to not support genocide.
I think you're dismissing quantitative changes because you haven't seen qualitative changes yet. I understand wanting to wait for qualitative changes to not be skeptical, but as Marxists we also understand that qualitative changes are an accumulation of quantitative changes, and there is very clear evidence of quantitative changes.
Stop putting c/the_dunk_tank content in the wrong comm
Not that I can tell, what did you think of the article?
It's interesting how you only draw comparisons with CPUSA. You claim that it has "the most potential to be the groundwork for a future party." I would contend, however, that the
is a current party that people can organize with today.You're Marxist Leninists, yet you do not organize under the principles of democratic centralism. Why not? Do you intend to somehow transform the DSA into a democratic centralist organization? Do you really believe that the liberals, social democrats, and democratic socialists that comprise most of the DSA would just go along with that? You can't expect to just take the existing membership of the DSA and magically convert them into a committed Marxist Leninist cadre.
As it stands, the DSA are not principled anti-imperialists, as evidenced by their failure to take a principled stance in support of Palestinian resistance in the wake of Al-Aqsa Flood, or their anti-communist stances on Cuba and AES. This isn't a "past" issue, it's ongoing. How do you address that? Why is it the "correct" strategy to attempt entryism into the DSA instead of joining a real, existing Marxist Leninist party?
Genuine question, I spent time with CPUSA and DSA, and still will go to events if they align with my values, but have largely found that the membership are primarily liberals who are very socially progressive, but ultimately only really care about domestic policy. Is the PSL considered more serious? I felt burned by the other two, but want to still be involved in local efforts where I can.
Check out FRSO if they're active where you live. We're explicitly ML and small but cool
Oh wait did you actually end up joining FRSO? That's dope! How's it been so far?
Good so far! I got a call from national leadership right away, who put me in touch with local leadership. I went to a general membership meeting and I'm meeting again today with someone to work through the theory study packet for new members. Everyone seems cool and communist, which is what I was looking for
Hell yeah, that's fucking awesome. I hope y'all do very well and that one day our movements are able to join together, either by forming a unity party or by struggling together officially. I've seen what you say on here and I have to say that I trust you when you say if it's working out and good then it's working out extremely well and is very good.
The PSL places a very high importance on anti-imperialism, and members are required to hold principled anti-imperialist stances and not be libs/regurgitate state department propaganda. This is demonstrated by the fact that the PSL (in coalition with other groups like PYM) were organizing protests in support of Palestinian resistance on October 8th while many other orgs are still arguing over whether to condemn Hamas to this day.
Yeah, in my experience across the board the PSL is a robust and ideologically coherent party with an incredibly engaged membership. Biased though, as this experience is colored by my experiences working as a member of the party. I think that one should join whatever principled and (importantly!) effective ML org in their area, but I'm happy to say that for me and my area it fills this role exactly.
I guess I haven't been particularly impressed by PSL from the outside? It seems like they put a lot of effort into presidential runs and that doesn't seem like a very good use of time?
At the local level, DSA folks are active in local Palestinian stuff, we see PSL folks at actions but we don't see them integrating as much into the logistics or trying to elevate the struggle. We see them agitating and mobilizing but not doing a good job organizing, and maybe that is because they keep it entirely internal but I'd expect to see more local PSL folks integrated by now if that was happening.
You're Marxist Leninists, yet you do not organize under the principles of democratic centralism.
??? Has red star said they aren't demcent?
Why not? Do you intend to somehow transform the DSA into a democratic centralist organization? Do you really believe that the liberals, social democrats, and democratic socialists that comprise most of the DSA would just go along with that? You can't expect to just take the existing membership of the DSA and magically convert them into a committed Marxist Leninist cadre.
I don't think you can magically make them MLs, but over the last few years DSA has moved significantly left, it can absolutely be made into a non-cringe org
As it stands, the DSA are not principled anti-imperialists, as evidenced by their failure to take a principled stance in support of Palestinian resistance in the wake of Al-Aqsa Flood, or their anti-communist stances on Cuba and AES. This isn't a "past" issue, it's ongoing. How do you address that? Why is it the "correct" strategy to attempt entryism into the DSA instead of joining a real, existing Marxist Leninist party?
I think the natural momentum of DSA is toward it being a more reliably anti-imperialist org, and I think it is worthwhile to add to it.
But on a more practical level, if in my local area there are more DSA folks engaged in pro-Palestinian actions than there even are PSL folks total, why would I join PSL? What practical advantages are gained by moving the pro-Palestine folks out of DSA?
It seems like they put a lot of effort into presidential runs and that doesn't seem like a very good use of time?
The presidential runs aren't an attempt to gain power by being elected to office. They are a propaganda campaign to spread a socialist platform. The campaign process itself is an opportunity to have tens or hundreds of thousands of conversations about our socialist platform. The amount of votes in the election are an interesting metric, but not a key objective.
we see PSL folks at actions but we don't see them integrating as much into the logistics or trying to elevate the struggle.
This is actually absurd. The PSL has been organizing in the struggle for Palestinian liberation for decades. They were organizing demonstrations on October 8th while almost everyone else was still condemning Hamas. They've organized like 5 mass protests on Washington. I don't know what your local scene looks like, but the PSL is the most important socialist org that is organizing for Palestinian liberation on a national scale.
The presidential runs aren't an attempt to gain power by being elected to office. They are a propaganda campaign to spread a socialist platform. The campaign process itself is an opportunity to have tens or hundreds of thousands of conversations about our socialist platform. The amount of votes in the election are an interesting metric, but not a key objective.
This still seems like a waste of time? Why not do something that can allow for conversations and also might have utility outside of allowing for conversations?
The DSA isn't, and I don't think they ever will be.
Is PSL actually demcent though? Is it true that up to 40 percent of the delegates are picked by the central committee? https://archive.org/details/party-for-socialism-and-liberation-psl-constitution-2022/page/6/mode/2up
How can you engage in demcent when the highest body can pick 40 percent of the delegates? That sounds like a recipe for bureaucratic ossification?
This is actually absurd. The PSL has been organizing in the struggle for Palestinian liberation for decades. They were organizing demonstrations on October 8th while the DSA was still condemning Hamas. They've organized like 5 mass protests on Washington. I don't know what your local scene looks like, but if you're weighing the relative importance of the PSL and the DSA in the national struggle for Palestinian liberation, it's the PSL and it's not even close.
All I can speak to is my local conditions, and my local conditions are we have two PSL folks who think passing out PSL stickers at protests is worthwhile but going to planning meetings isn't. We're trying to get folks to think more strategically, about what they're trying to accomplish and how to meet those goals, and it feels like PSL is just interested in shallowly engaging for recruitment.
That's a shame that your local branch isn't very effective, my experience in a branch that's been growing's been far more positive. At the very least though, to share, the recruitment isn't for shallow purposes.
The focus on recruitment is because the point of a practical socialist party like the PSL isn't to simply subsume all struggle into itself, this would be absurd, but instead to act as a unifying organ for those who already dedicate time in the community. This can be the reason behind the focus on recruitment, as essentially, there are tons of socialists and socialist-friendly folks who put together critical movements and orgs locally who, on becoming a member of the PSL, can have their work and effort boosted by being able to rely on other comrades within the party and the political education programs it provides. Overcoming this friction of low local membership at first though is pretty difficult, and likely why it just seems like two folks handing out stickers for now, but, I can't really say, just my experience.
I guess it might be an issue of locality- I feel like I can get access to experienced socialist organizers for free, and I can take part in and advance the quality of poli-ed for free? Like, you can read Lenin and Fanon in a group and not pay 200 dollars a month for it, you know?
Unfortunately we're building movements, not simply working to improve oneself. I take the stance of the wonderful revolutionaries before me and put extensive time and money into trying to help foster an independent and Democratic ML Party beholdened to it's own membership. I'm extremely happy to be putting a portion of my income aside to help grow this desparately needed and professional party organ in the US. We're not only trying to educate ourselves, but entire sections of the working class, and that requires outreach and power only attained by a well planned, coordinated, and smart party.
They were heavily involved in the Red Line protests in Washington DC. I'd be curious to know if DSA/Red Star or if CPUSA was involved in organizing for that protest. Or any of the other anti-genocide protests in the last few months.
Oh PSL has been a lot better than DSA nationals at organizing large protests, totally. I have other problems with PSL, from their election structure to how my local PSL seems to operate, which is were I'd be spending the overwhelming amount of my time if I were to hop orgs.
Has Trot roots, but generally works as a regular Marxist-Leninist party now. Same with Workers World Party and a few others. They're cool now.
They support AES and anti-imperialist movements. Not "trots" in the same way those wreckers are.
The PSL split from a party that was, many decades ago, a Trot party. But the PSL itself has never been a Trot party (split memes notwithstanding), and that history is pretty irrelevant to what the party is today.
The PSL doesn't really bother to have "a line" on Trotsky or Stalin. Rather, it correctly eschews that "great person" framing of history and instead analyses the historical material conditions of the Soviet Union etc. It's certainly not "anti-Stalinist" like Trots always are; nobody is going to look at you strangely for speaking positively of Stalin.
No no, I'm saying that PSL doesn't do any of the shit we hate trots for. They're cool.
Did you write this article?
I haven't read it yet, but just curious given the other reply here.
quick google search to make sure the emperor of germany is still dead...
Communists belong in the objective left wing of fascism. Yeah, okay. Good. Cool.
Wasn't that one of Stalin's rare L's though? Social democrats can move in either direction, some of them shot rosa, some of them fought nazis and joined in the post ww2 socialist coalition governments and were integrated with the communists. (Czechoslovakia comes to mind) How many hexbears started out as social democrats during Bernie 2016?
You're looking at it as though it's Calvinism. Stalin's statement is about where the ideology of social democracy fits into the framework of class struggle, not about how everyone who at any point identifies as socdem has the soul of a fascist and has never and will never do anything worthwhile. The point of his statement is that the purpose social democracy serves is the maintenance of capitalism and therefore that people working towards social-democratic ends are working on maintaining capitalism (which is also the job of fascism and fascists, though they accomplish it differently and under different circumstances).
That individual socdems radicalized or fought in self-defense or whatever has no bearing on the statement. What matters for it is that the socdem organization of the SPD, on the eve of revolution, chose to protect capitalism (even though many of its own members objected), demonstrating how even those smol bean well-meaning SPD members who just didn't appreciate Rosa's message until her corpse was dumped in the river nonetheless had been working towards the benefit and promotion of just the organization responsible for it.
Stalin joining the allies also has no bearing on this. It fails to comprehend the difference between ideological conflict and political conflict. What Stalin was drawing were the lines of ideological conflict, which is vindicated a thousand times over by the US, Britain, etc. materially supporting Nazi Germany up until the latter's expansionism put it and the various liberal states into political conflict. Because of this political conflict, it made sense to ally in the war with these liberal states, but that by no means made them somehow fellow-travelers, as demonstrated by how the US didn't even wait until the end of the war to start making barbaric plays in the interest of checking the power of the Soviet Union.
This exactly. As I've indicated in other parts of the thread, the primary problem of the moment is that of political education. This whole thread is an absolute testament to that. Everybody is so excited to share the good news of communism without having a complex understanding of a non-memyfied version of it. People mistake entertainment (especially shit-postimg) for education.
Perhaps I am a dour nerd in a corner on this, but I am fine with that, it won't be the first or last time.
The important thing is to use it as an opportunity to educate and not just bemoan lacking education (not that you did that, I saw some of you talking about things constructively).
TBF folks are out here being Calvinists in this thread to individual succdems.
But yeah, I agree, don't join social democratic orgs. But DSA isn't a social democrat org, it sure is contested by them, but the majority of the NPC is a mixture of communists of varying levels of good.
TBF folks are out here being Calvinists in this thread to individual succdems.
Then it's a good thing I would never equate Stalin, for whatever faults he might have had, with a bunch of memelords on a shitposting website.
DSA isn’t a social democrat org
It absolutely is. A few individual self-identified communists in leadership positions of an org founded on social democracy with explicitly anticommunist bylaws that historically and currently pursues an exclusively social democratic strategy don't change the character of the organization. The character of the organization is determined by the actions it takes.
There's a huge difference between personal politics and organizational politics. There's massive inertia and the fact that it's by definition a democratic socialist organization.
There's value in joining if there's no other org you can be a part of, or maybe to poach people, but you'll never drive them significantly left.
There is massive inertia, and the NPC is currently minority social democrat. The problem is Trotskyists with shitty third camp opinions making up the deciding votes, which is a better situation than a previously social democrat led org, and you know, those folks can be further pushed as they see the consequences of their actions not work out as they hoped. They're not mustache twirling villians, they're just wrong.
And if you are still a social democrat after the 2020 election cycle, you either weren't paying attention, and shouldn't be trusted, or you are hopelessly naive, and shouldn't be trusted.
Fuck socdems, but I feel like you're ignoring that not everyone is in your age cohort and experiencing things with the context you were. Also, like, politically disengaged people absolutely should be a target of agitation, what the hell are you talking about?
That doesn't mean I need to caucus with them or consider them my allies, like people in the DSA often do.
idk, I can totally see DSA members becoming disengaged just like I can see Dem voters becoming disengaged (but I repeat myself). It's a natural reaction to putting effort in and not getting anywhere, and the DSA has a long history of not getting anywhere and just diverting energy into the Democratic machine or whatever. I think my original statement stands.
Fair enough. My original statements are incorrect then. But my opinion on the DSA and engaging politically with the DSA remains unchanged.
And if you are still a social democrat after the 2020 election cycle, you either weren't paying attention, and shouldn't be trusted, or you are hopelessly naive, and shouldn't be trusted.
What percent of the US population is currently beyond social democrat? We don't have to win over most people, but we have to win over some people to socialism. Like, IDK, a couple percent? I trust them less if they learn now than if they learned a while ago, but it is still worth educating folks. I've seen some folks really change for the better in the time I've been in DSA.
Then win them over in an actual communist organization while improving your own understanding of revolutionary theory? Join the PSL. Trying to convince comrades who are not currently active in political organizations to salt the DSA is a massive waste of time. This is bad theory.
If you are already in the DSA and already have connections there, then there is little harm in trying to push them further left, but you should ALSO be seeking a party that is ACTUALLY in line with your ACTUAL values. You are literally fighting against senior members and an anti-communist culture with decades of entrenchment, and to believe that you can change that is also hopelessly naive. The DSA is not a bottom-up organization, the bottom is purposefully disorganized.
THE PSL isn't capable of doing demcent or scientific socialism if this is correct? https://archive.org/details/party-for-socialism-and-liberation-psl-constitution-2022/page/6/mode/2up
The central committee being able to select up to 40 percent of delegates means it's going to be inflexible and less capable of developing in the long term, even if it starting from a better ideological position.
We are not at the point where flexibility is needed, we are at a point where incredibly basic political education is needed. You are literally making excuses not to join an actual communist organization, when the DSA does not, and can never, actually resemble a communist organization.
I am more concerned about long term development- not having democracy isn't conducive to scientific socialism, and you aren't demcent without the dem.
Idk what exactly your line of thinking on this is. It seems like you are creating arbitrary purity tests that the whole 'Join the DSA' schtick fails to pass muster.
If you are concerned with long term development, then maybe your time would be better spent working within an already existing communist organization that consistently has good opinions to open up to more demcent practices, than an anti-communist organization (which also doesn't practice demcent organization or scientific socialism) to not only adopt those practices, but ALSO adopt consistently anti-imperialist politics.
Then join another group that better represents your vision of demcent policy and scientific socialism, or fuck, make your own party. My point is that the DSA is not worth a comrades who are not already established members within its time.
I really don't see how "hey, your org very clearly isn't democratic" is a purity test. PSL straight up isn't democratic in internal structure, internal democratic structure is actually important for a party to function in a healthy way.
Then join another group that better represents your vision of demcent policy and scientific socialism, or fuck, make your own party. My point is that the DSA is not worth a comrades who are not already established members within its time.
"join a sect or form another sect" is a deeply unserious suggestion. Like the whole argument here is "there are better orgs out there" and there really isn't if you actually want to do work with a critical mass.
Most of the actually existing demcent parties weren't 'very democratic' by liberal standards. There was usually political education that was required for even basic entry (outside of provisional) unless you were engaged in direct militancy and then on top of that you were still usually beholden to the party bureaucratic structuring, that would affect how votes were cast. Organizations aren't perfect, they're people.
Context matters, when you are attempting maintain an anti-imperialist leftist org in the imperialist core, you have to maintain political cohesion and the only way to do that is through some level of top-down party control. Otherwise ultras (whom may or may not be feds) will come in, and they will ruin your shit. The U.S. feds in particular got really good at disrupting demcent parties in the 70's and 80's. Perhaps they have gotten relaxed in their tactics now that the USSR isn't priority number one, but given the state of Western leftist organizations, it doesn't take much to completely knock it off base with abit of propaganda about the 'anti-imperialist' leadership and you're back to square one. Most of the principled leftist orgs I know are in siege mode and focused entirely on education and getting people into places where they can be educated. Good or bad, that's where it's at atm. Honestly, I'm surprised the CC isn't in full control of the party management in the PSL.
It's not about 'hanging with the cool kids because soc-dems are sooooo annoying'. This isn't high school. It's about getting people who are interested into revolutionary education that acknowledges and understands the role of revolutionary defeatism, and the current and past revolutionary proletarian history of the U.S. And socdems, and even most baby leftists I know are not ideologically willing (and likely will never be willing) to sacrifice imperialism (particularly moral) if it comes at the cost of material comfort, which it always does, because that is not why people join (or in particular stay) the DSA.
Look, you clearly want to engage with 'the mass' through the DSA and push it left, so go for it (edit: keep at it). Personally, I've seen how this works time and again, writ small. I don't have much hope for it writ large. Maybe times have changed and the context is different. If it works, I'll gladly shut my mouth and join the DSA (again).
You can say I am making unserious suggestions, but given that some people here riffed that your suggestion is an April Fool's joke, all suggestions are unserious until they suddenly aren't.
Most of the actually existing demcent parties weren't 'very democratic' by liberal standards. There was usually political education that was required for even basic entry (outside of provisional) unless you were engaged in direct militancy and then on top of that you were still usually beholden to the party bureaucratic structuring, that would affect how votes were cast. Organizations aren't perfect, they're people.
I def support political education as a requirement for vanguard/center purposes, but that isn't what this is about.
Context matters, when you are attempting maintain an anti-imperialist leftist org in the imperialist core, you have to maintain political cohesion and the only way to do that is through some level of top-down party control. Otherwise ultras (whom may or may not be feds) will come in, and they will ruin your shit (CPUSA specifically comes to mind).
Isn't CPUSA another example of an org that claims to be demcent but is just cent? Isn't this not a good example to use? Feds got up high in the internal structure and used their cent against them.
Most of the principled leftist orgs I know are in siege mode and focused entirely on education and getting people into places where they can be educated. Good or bad, that's where it's at atm. Honestly, I'm surprised the CC isn't in full control of the party management in the PSL.
PSL just straight up isn't in the illegal period. And even during the illegal period, the bolsheviks didn't enter "siege mode" If you're in siege mode now, what is PSL going to do when shit continues to get worse? Does PSL foresee a period where there is less political repression in the US than there is now?
It's not about 'hanging with the cool kids because soc-dems are sooooo annoying'. This isn't high school. It's about getting people who are interested into revolutionary education that acknowledges and understands the role of revolutionary defeatism, and the current and past revolutionary proletarian history of the U.S. And most socdems, and even baby leftists I know are not ideologically willing (and likely will never be willing) to sacrifice imperialism (particularly moral) if it comes at the cost of material comfort, which it always does, because that is not why people join the DSA.
-
You're going to eventually have to talk about imperialism with not-particularly politically developed social democrats.
-
"It's about getting people who are interested in..." to do what?
, I've seen how this works time and again, writ small. I don't have much hope for it writ large.
Literally be a historical materialist about it. The july 26 movement and the bolsheviks both emerged from and participated in less disciplined orgs, they didn't exile themselves. Can you name a successful vanguard of a movement that isolated themselves like US sects do?
I'm not 'exiling' myself. I just will not pay dues to the DSA ever again until I see a real shift in the relationship between the regional and national parties.
CPUSA, to my knowledge, started demcent, then became cent over time as the leadership tightened under 'fed' (or democrat comprador, at least) control, to the point now that it is now completely centralized. The history is alittle wonky there, at there is a lot of documentation on that is old head and zine knowledge lost to time at this point imo. I am unsure of the trajectory of the PSL in that regard (which is something to look into), I just assumed by their stances and prominence they would be nearly completely centralized (which hey, egg on my face). In my personal experience, I have just had easier times discussing the state of things with their members, so imo clearly they are doing something right imo from an education or recruitment perspective. They seem clearly focused on getting ideologically trained members willing to participate in immediate and responsive direct action (one of the reasons I didn't join, cause I wasn't sticking around in tbe area). To what end, I couldn't say, perhaps their protest logistical training is poor.
I already have to talk to social democrats and baby leftists all the time. It wouldn't help me for them to have organizational cover.
For context, where I am living now, there is no left-wing movement to speak of at all. Most of the students I was around didn't even know what 'Palestine' was, let alone that there were protests going on at other campuses. The ones who did know either had friends on other campuses getting arrested, or because their conservative parents had asked them about it. But I do what I can, go to Marx reading group, discuss Marxism in public when the topic arises and history broadly when I can, but between working two jobs in the summer and a job and school it is tough to remain politically active in an area where it is not really self-sustaining.
If you are actually in the thick of it, you are more active than I am atm, and can make better judgements as to where your time is best spent. I was not impressed by the DSA to say the least, but hey, time moves ever forward.
-
Stalin himself would go on to ally with governments to the right of social democracies in order to fight actual fascists. It's absolutely an L that he lumped them all in together as basically the same. It's also absurd to be so dogmatic about a comment made 100 years ago in a wildly different political and material context.
How many hexbears started out as social democrats during Bernie 2016?
At the end of the day, these are people who've taken a concrete step left of the Democratic Party. We should be convincing them to take more steps, not calling them fascists.
Okay, but consider ceding the terrain where the baby social democrats and socialists congregate to groundwork and SMC because social democrats are annoying? : P Then we'd be able to hang out in the cool kids club without having to constantly explain ourselves to the semi-organized masses, which communists, as you know, hate doing.
Nope, although some caucuses have published stuff like this: https://redstarcaucus.org/cuban-links/ and the international committee is establishing guidelines for future trips to prevent the same nonsense from happening. We should apologize but Cuba also understands that DSA is a big tent org with some shitty folks in it.
DSA communist paper says communists should join DSA. In other news red flags are indeed red.
Okay, so I read the article. But I have to say I've really enjoyed the back-and-forth between you and others supporting the PSL. Besides being fun
, it is genuinely enlightening so I want to thank you for participating in the discussion.I have to admit I also have an anti-DSA bias because of bad experiences with DSA I've had myself, but I also know good people that were heavily involved in DSA and eventually got burned. So I appreciate the work of trying to push it further to the Left and to accept a more Communist guideline. I can especially appreciate since sometimes it's the only Leftist game in town for some areas, so it isn't totally meaningless to push, in my opinion. And I don't really know as much about PSL but I do have a tendency to think that if Communists can that they should join a Marxist-Leninist Party.
Whether that should necessarily be PSL or another Party, I don't know. And your critique about the Central Committee choosing 40% of the delegates is a good one, I can also see how a desire to maintain the direction and ideology of a relatively new Communist organization requires some suspension of democracy. But undoing the liberal concept of "democracy" is something I've mentioned recently before is something I've been working on myself, I think sometimes a Communist Party doesn't need to be fully democratic if it's defending or implementing proper Communist ideology. On the other hand, I also don't know if I would personally want to join some Party where my position and contribution is less important and meaningful in the face of bureaucratism. Maybe that's my own ego I also need to work on, and I wouldn't want to be Party Leader or anything, but I do see value in seeing and feeling your work going into something that wasn't already decided for you.
Anyway, interesting post so thanks for posting and discussing!
I think democracy is important for non-ego reasons- scientific socialism works better within an internal democracy, democratic consultation and deliberation create institutional knowledge in a way bureaucracies don't.
I don't see any reasonable benefit to PSL not being democratic at this stage of the struggle- if they don't have the educational capacity to onboard new members they should create probation membership status (less ideal but those membership dues though) or stagger cohorts.
You're not wrong. I do think provisional membership or something would be better than just allowing as many people in as possible and not letting it actually be democratic, but I also think there may be conditions where what PSL is doing would be right.
But communists can already canvass for the Democrats in the CPUSA. What is the point of them joining the DSA?
Doing things besides canvassing for democrats? Lots of chapters aren't interested in being a dog for the democratic party, and the national vibes are growing more skeptical as evidence mounts against the viability of change through democrats.
after the revolution, begging the revolutionary gen alpha-ers to just shoot me instead of sentencing me to a late 2010s DSA convention roleplay
